Why have the McCanns taken Mr Amaral to court?

by Guest 19.09.13 9:44

I have a huge problem getting my head round this.

Putting myself in Kate's shoes, whatever happened to Madeleine, my first instinct would be to tell the truth. However I can see that, in my distress, I might be persuaded to take part in a cover-up.

When made arguidos, I can understand sticking to the story.

For me, getting home to Rothley would be the cut-off point.

OK, we need to sue the Express to muzzle the press but then step out of the limelight, everyone keep their heads down and let's be grateful we/I dodged the bullet.

I cannot for the life of me understand anything the McCanns have done beyond that point - the interviews, the book, the documentary, Leveson, the review, Pat Brown, Tony Bennett, Mr Amaral etc. etc.

The best analogy I can come up with for their behavior is that there is a stick of dynamite and, instead of walking away to relative safety, the McCanns have been flicking lit matches at it.

Why would they do that? huh

by Praiaaa 19.09.13 9:49

Because IMO they are narcissistic and greedy and with an overweening sense of entitlement. Their bully-boy tactic worked with the Express, so they were emboldened to bully others. Like all bullies, they had no Plan B when GA refused to give them his dinner money.

by Guest 19.09.13 10:44

Praiaaa wrote:Because IMO they are narcissistic and greedy and with an overweening sense of entitlement. Their bully-boy tactic worked with the Express, so they were emboldened to bully others. Like all bullies, they had no Plan B when GA refused to give them his dinner money.

Thank you Praiaa!

Your post reminded me of the Hare Psychopathy Checklist.

From Wikipedia: wrote:Factor 1: Interpersonal/Affective

Glibness/superficial charm

Grandiose sense of self-worth

Pathological lying

Cunning/manipulative

Lack of remorse or guilt

Shallow affect (genuine emotion is short-lived and egocentric)

Callousness; lack of empathy

Failure to accept responsibility for his or her own actions

Factor 2: Lifestyle/Antisocial

Need for stimulation/proneness to boredom

Parasitic lifestyle

Poor behavioral control

Lack of realistic long-term goals

Impulsiveness

Irresponsibility

Juvenile delinquency

Early behavior problems

Revocation of conditional release

Criminal versatility

Traits not correlated with either factor

Promiscuous sexual behavior

Many short-term (marital) relationships

Acquired behavioral sociopathy/sociological conditioning (Item 21: a newly identified trait i.e., a person relying on sociological strategies and tricks to deceive)

For each characteristic that is listed, the subject is given a score: 0 for "no," 1 for "somewhat," and 2 for "definitely does apply." A score of 30 or above indicates psychopathy.

I have no medical qualifications and I would not presume to diagnose anyone's mental health but many of those traits do seem very familiar.

Suddenly I don't feel the need to understand the McCanns behaviour!

by Angelique 19.09.13 10:45

Poe

I too have been thinking about this, trying to figure what would have resulted in the saga which has unfolded concerning the disappearance of Madeleine and the resulting enormous attention they have drawn to this tragic event.

Oddly enough I was discussing it this morning with a friend. The way I look at the situation is that for some reason, as has been mentioned in another thread, they have some sort of hold on two Governments, the UK and through them, Portugal.

This is only my opinion as of now.

What is it that they know or have evidence of that can have such power like this?
Is it because someone else was involved, who wields such power that it could result in what has occurred.

I think it might be so.

I think that the McCanns were not involved with what “initially” happened to Madeleine and after that they had no choice in behaving as they did. I mean by “no choice” that they were told exactly what they had to do and have been doing since Madeleine disappeared. This would explain why they can contradict themselves at will and change their statements in interviews, and in their statements. No one will step in and protest, neither Government nor Police.

I think maybe the resultant actions over the past years, which you have stated have been a sort of revenge. But they have lost a child and it seems nothing they do will suffice or give them peace. Even to the point of affecting the lives of Tony Bennet and Goncalo Amaral, both financially and personally. It could also be that whilst they are in the midst of all this activity, interviews, Book etc., they are able to cope with the loss. This could explain the “stick of dynamite” you refer to. As soon as it stops (no more matches) maybe then their true grieving will start. But it will destroy them. If not mentally, then physically.

by Dr What 19.09.13 10:53

Once they created a 'version' of the truth, and created a story that supported this version, and then created a carefully rehearsed image, then they had to take it all the way.

I don't for one minute believe that they thought that they could win this libel case, but for the sake of this image, they had to, even if it is half-hearted.

Of course, all this is much easier to do when you don't have to depend upon your own money to do so.

by sallypelt 19.09.13 11:05

Dr What wrote:Once they created a 'version' of the truth, and created a story that supported this version, and then created a carefully rehearsed image, then they had to take it all the way.

I don't for one minute believe that they thought that they could win this libel case, but for the sake of this image, they had to, even if it is half-hearted.

Of course, all this is much easier to do when you don't have to depend upon your own money to do so.

And there's one thing that one can depend on, more than all the money in the world, and that's TRUTH

"Truth is by nature self-evident. As soon as you remove the cobwebs of ignorance that surround it, it shines clear" .Mahatma Gandhi

by Guest 19.09.13 11:25

Angelique

That's an interesting theory.

If the government were covering for the McCanns, the McCanns would have been told to keep quiet. Maybe they'd have been rolled out for Leveson before being put back in their box.

On the other hand, if the McCanns have information that the government want keeping under wraps, maybe the only thing that's keeping the McCanns safe is staying in the public eye.

Dr What

I love your name laughat

I suppose it would have been too painful for their egos to withdraw from the case and announce to the press that they had "forgiven GA for Madeleine's sake" whilst super-injunctioning everything in sight and warning GA to stay away from the UK.

by Mike 19.09.13 13:12

I don't think the McCann's have got anything on the Government because those kind of people are usually dealt with the same way as Dr David Kelly.

by comperedna 19.09.13 13:36

True, esp that last posting. I do think that by now they may well believe their own rhetoric.

by Ayniia 19.09.13 13:54

Dr What wrote:Once they created a 'version' of the truth, and created a story that supported this version, and then created a carefully rehearsed image, then they had to take it all the way.

I don't for one minute believe that they thought that they could win this libel case, but for the sake of this image, they had to, even if it is half-hearted.

Of course, all this is much easier to do when you don't have to depend upon your own money to do so.

I think that in the beginning when they sued GA they believe they'd win. Money, it's all about money, that will be their downfall... IMO they just didn't count with one thing, the very very slow Portuguese justice system!: )

by plebgate 19.09.13 14:16

Ayniia wrote:
Dr What wrote:Once they created a 'version' of the truth, and created a story that supported this version, and then created a carefully rehearsed image, then they had to take it all the way.

I don't for one minute believe that they thought that they could win this libel case, but for the sake of this image, they had to, even if it is half-hearted.

Of course, all this is much easier to do when you don't have to depend upon your own money to do so.
I think that in the beginning when they sued GA they believe they'd win. Money, it's all about money, that will be their downfall... IMO they just didn't count with one thing, the very very slow Portuguese justice system!: )

Once Mr. A. would not settle they had no option but to carry on imo. Back out and we can imagine what everyone would have posted on internet - NOT in mainstream media imo, but going ahead there was/is always a possibility of it going in their favour. IMO it will not.

by Guest 19.09.13 15:02

IMO they're simply protecting their product. Reputation is one thing but their actions have caused more raised eyes than anything Goncalo Amaral, Tony Bennett or any other media could ever write about. Their product generates revenue so if another is to profit materially from it then they'll go after that revenue. They clawed it back successfully from the newspapers so why not go after Amaral. I don't see they have a lot to lose but everything to gain.

by Who?What?Where? 21.09.13 1:10

Angelique wrote:Poe

I too have been thinking about this, trying to figure what would have resulted in the saga which has unfolded concerning the disappearance of Madeleine and the resulting enormous attention they have drawn to this tragic event.

Oddly enough I was discussing it this morning with a friend. The way I look at the situation is that for some reason, as has been mentioned in another thread, they have some sort of hold on two Governments, the UK and through them, Portugal.

This is only my opinion as of now.

What is it that they know or have evidence of that can have such power like this?
Is it because someone else was involved, who wields such power that it could result in what has occurred.

I think it might be so.

I think that the McCanns were not involved with what “initially” happened to Madeleine and after that they had no choice in behaving as they did. I mean by “no choice” that they were told exactly what they had to do and have been doing since Madeleine disappeared. This would explain why they can contradict themselves at will and change their statements in interviews, and in their statements. No one will step in and protest, neither Government nor Police.

I think maybe the resultant actions over the past years, which you have stated have been a sort of revenge. But they have lost a child and it seems nothing they do will suffice or give them peace. Even to the point of affecting the lives of Tony Bennet and Goncalo Amaral, both financially and personally. It could also be that whilst they are in the midst of all this activity, interviews, Book etc., they are able to cope with the loss. This could explain the “stick of dynamite” you refer to. As soon as it stops (no more matches) maybe then their true grieving will start. But it will destroy them. If not mentally, then physically.

That is a very interesting point within your post Angelique, thanks for that.

If I have understood it correctly, the McCanns' have not focussed their venom upon the people who are the real problem. They have focussed it on the, possible, solution to the real problem. That is a, potentially, massive mistake.

They could not possibly sue the establishment for sinking them deeper into this mess, because it is the establishment who are protecting them?

They are now caught between a rock and a hard place, with nowhere else to go? Unless the real truth comes out

by Guest 21.09.13 1:18

Finn wrote:IMO they're simply protecting their product. Reputation is one thing but their actions have caused more raised eyes than anything Goncalo Amaral, Tony Bennett or any other media could ever write about. Their product generates revenue so if another is to profit materially from it then they'll go after that revenue. They clawed it back successfully from the newspapers so why not go after Amaral. I don't see they have a lot to lose but everything to gain.

Horridly put; but probably close to the truth

by aiyoyo 21.09.13 10:16

Portia wrote:
Finn wrote:IMO they're simply protecting their product. Reputation is one thing but their actions have caused more raised eyes than anything Goncalo Amaral, Tony Bennett or any other media could ever write about. Their product generates revenue so if another is to profit materially from it then they'll go after that revenue. They clawed it back successfully from the newspapers so why not go after Amaral. I don't see they have a lot to lose but everything to gain.
Horridly put; but probably close to the truth

Probably too true.
They dont have to ask for money compensation in their case against Amaral, if all they ever want is for the book to be taken off circulation.
Their asking price of an astronomical price of 1.2M shows their GREED.

by Cristobell 21.09.13 10:31

aiyoyo wrote:
Portia wrote:
Finn wrote:IMO they're simply protecting their product. Reputation is one thing but their actions have caused more raised eyes than anything Goncalo Amaral, Tony Bennett or any other media could ever write about. Their product generates revenue so if another is to profit materially from it then they'll go after that revenue. They clawed it back successfully from the newspapers so why not go after Amaral. I don't see they have a lot to lose but everything to gain.
Horridly put; but probably close to the truth
Probably too true.
They dont have to ask for money compensation in their case against Amaral, if all they ever want is for the book to be taken off circulation.
Their asking price of an astronomical price of 1.2M shows their GREED.

They have probably had in the region of £3m from the public, book, online shop etc, thats just a ballpark figure, it could be well in excess of that.

We know they haven't spent it on the search, so where has it gone? Why are they so desperate for that 1.2 million Euros from Goncalo Amaral?

In the aftermath of Madeleine being 'taken', Gerry said they did not think they needed a Fund, yet by June 2007 when the coffers were full they were fundraising like seasoned experts. The 50 day balloon launch being a good example. Why would searching for one child take millions of pounds? They played with the wording of the Fund's objectives several times to ensure that they would never have to hand over the 'remainder' to any genuine charities.

I really don't see how Scotland Yard can investigate this case without taking a very close look at the Madeleine Fund.

Goncalo's Ace - http://cristobell.blogspot.co.uk/