Parents withdraw from Lorraine interview
The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ :: Madeleine Beth McCann :: Madeleine's 1st - 17th year anniversaries
Page 5 of 5 • Share
Page 5 of 5 • 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
Re: Parents withdraw from Lorraine interview
I would like the entire country to sue them for making us all unwilling participants in their personal Groundhog Day.
Mirage- Posts : 1905
Activity : 2711
Likes received : 764
Join date : 2013-02-01
Re: Parents withdraw from Lorraine interview
Come on, Mirage, show a bit of compassion, after all, they've given an awful lot of people a raison d'etre, or put colloquially, a life.
Realist- Posts : 421
Activity : 602
Likes received : 179
Join date : 2014-11-05
Re: Parents withdraw from Lorraine interview
Nope, can't squeeze out a smidgeon of compassion, Realist.
Gerald P McCann's omnipresence as the pantomime villain of real life was never an existential choice.
Gerald P McCann's omnipresence as the pantomime villain of real life was never an existential choice.
Mirage- Posts : 1905
Activity : 2711
Likes received : 764
Join date : 2013-02-01
Re: Parents withdraw from Lorraine interview
But yer've gotta admit, he's kept an awful lot of people entertained over a prolonged period of time. Who else was going to take the place of Saddam Hussein, who else were the tabloids going to portray as the person everyone loves to hate.
Realist- Posts : 421
Activity : 602
Likes received : 179
Join date : 2014-11-05
Re: Parents withdraw from Lorraine interview
Things must be well & truly desperate if the Rothley Two daren't appear on Lorraine out of fear.
For goodness sake, her previous interviews were like being mauled by a dead sheep - as Denis Healey would have said
For goodness sake, her previous interviews were like being mauled by a dead sheep - as Denis Healey would have said
Rogue-a-Tory- Posts : 647
Activity : 1115
Likes received : 454
Join date : 2014-09-10
Re: Parents withdraw from Lorraine interview
They have read all the online posts since Amaral's win and they know they have now well and truly lost the support of the British public .
maebee- Madeleine Foundation
- Posts : 503
Activity : 682
Likes received : 103
Join date : 2009-12-03
Location : Ireland
Re: Parents withdraw from Lorraine interview
melisande wrote:The Crimewatch appeal mugshot. They were terrified. I don't think they are party to any information that comes from the investigation no matter what 'a source says' . They will have been legally advised not to do any interviews because of the book too of course but I am sure OG plays a big part too. The 3 burglar story has already been debunked within hours of yesterday's story. SY have never admitted to leaking that story as far as I am aware.Ladyinred wrote:If the story is true, then I believe it's related to Amaral. This is a huge setback for the parents but, more importantly, a victory for Amaral, which they can't stomach. They're seething, apparently.melisande wrote:I would like to think this is more to do with Operation Grange than G. Amaral. They haven't done any interviews recently. They can't discuss anything to do with OG or any recent events because OG are not on their side even if Clarence' statements suggest they are All questions would have and did go through Clarence first before they went on air. What can they say about Madeleine's disappearance? First question asked "why do you think Madeleine never left PdL/Portugal? Now that would give them a lot of difficulty. They will have been advised that it would too risky to go on TV. It would be as bad as going to a Court of Law.
How do you know that OG are not on-side?
I think its clear Scotland Yard have been leakproof and I commend them for it.
Unless there are things they have released as bait. We shall see.
loopzdaloop- Posts : 389
Activity : 481
Likes received : 60
Join date : 2013-02-01
Re: Parents withdraw from Lorraine interview
Realist wrote:No disrespect, Penny, but in the eyes of the law, the only 'distance' between accident and murder is manslaughter. Manslaughter, although the lesser offence, is still a criminal matter with the difference being that it carries a far lesser penalty upon conviction. Anything classified as accidental is not a criminal offence.pennylane wrote:
I've tried to explain that there is a lot of distance between 'accident' and 'murder'
A verdict of accidental death would not have jeopardised the McCann's careers, their financial standing, or the custody of their children, whereas a criminal conviction of manslaughter would. I don't personally opine that the McCanns deliberately set out to murder their daughter, au contraire, I am of the opinion that her demise was a direct result of something out of the normal parameter of parental care they did to her. Whether it was a consequence of drugging, smacking, abusing etc. is immaterial, it would still be classified as manslaughter, as opposed to accidental.
In layperson's terms and I stand to be corrected, the basic difference between an action being classified as accidental and manslaughter is that the former is not a consequence of one's actions, whereas the latter is. An action doesn't have to be intentional to be classified as manslaughter, it could for instance, result from reckless behaviour, irresponsibility etc.
If it was found they drugged their kids, the other ones would have been taken and they would also have lost their careers. They felt they were between a rock and a hard place & given Gerry's personality you can see why he went the way he did after his initial breakdown that kate wrote about.
loopzdaloop- Posts : 389
Activity : 481
Likes received : 60
Join date : 2013-02-01
Re: Parents withdraw from Lorraine interview
Rogue-a-Tory wrote:Things must be well & truly desperate if the Rothley Two daren't appear on Lorraine out of fear.
For goodness sake, her previous interviews were like being mauled by a dead sheep - as Denis Healey would have said
But ITV didn't invite them....if you believe it.
But they got bids (whatever that meant - fee levels maybe) around the world and had to turn those down too.
Nuh, they can't face questions.....not even from fawning Kelly !
aiyoyo- Posts : 9610
Activity : 10084
Likes received : 326
Join date : 2009-11-28
Re: Parents withdraw from Lorraine interview
Seriously? OG has leaked all sorts of claptrap over the last 5 years, either through the pink peril or its own spin doctors.loopzdaloop wrote:melisande wrote:The Crimewatch appeal mugshot. They were terrified. I don't think they are party to any information that comes from the investigation no matter what 'a source says' . They will have been legally advised not to do any interviews because of the book too of course but I am sure OG plays a big part too. The 3 burglar story has already been debunked within hours of yesterday's story. SY have never admitted to leaking that story as far as I am aware.Ladyinred wrote:If the story is true, then I believe it's related to Amaral. This is a huge setback for the parents but, more importantly, a victory for Amaral, which they can't stomach. They're seething, apparently.melisande wrote:I would like to think this is more to do with Operation Grange than G. Amaral. They haven't done any interviews recently. They can't discuss anything to do with OG or any recent events because OG are not on their side even if Clarence' statements suggest they are All questions would have and did go through Clarence first before they went on air. What can they say about Madeleine's disappearance? First question asked "why do you think Madeleine never left PdL/Portugal? Now that would give them a lot of difficulty. They will have been advised that it would too risky to go on TV. It would be as bad as going to a Court of Law.
How do you know that OG are not on-side?
I think its clear Scotland Yard have been leakproof and I commend them for it.
Unless there are things they have released as bait. We shall see.
Rogue-a-Tory- Posts : 647
Activity : 1115
Likes received : 454
Join date : 2014-09-10
Re: Parents withdraw from Lorraine interview
BHH confirmed the imminent arrests reportage live on air. Five Live and around 2014 IIRC. I call that a bit leaky.
Mirage- Posts : 1905
Activity : 2711
Likes received : 764
Join date : 2013-02-01
Re: Parents withdraw from Lorraine interview
I'm much more of a reader now than a poster. I haven't posted in a while but recent events have given me fresh hope. For the first time in years the McCanns are NOT courting attention, in fact actively shying away from it and squirming out of it. There has to be a reason for that. I am so happy for Goncalo Amaral. Someone posted earlier that the recent court decision has nothing to do with their culpability for events but with his freedom of expression. I agree but this decision is also very important for public perception.
Also, if it has ultimately been decided (at the moment) that Amaral has the right to say these things, does that therefore mean that they are not libellous? And does that therefore confirm (although we already knew) that they are factual?
People's opinion may very well change in respect of dog alerts, car hire evidence, timeline discrepancies, behavioural evidence etc
Also, if it has ultimately been decided (at the moment) that Amaral has the right to say these things, does that therefore mean that they are not libellous? And does that therefore confirm (although we already knew) that they are factual?
People's opinion may very well change in respect of dog alerts, car hire evidence, timeline discrepancies, behavioural evidence etc
nglfi- Posts : 568
Activity : 866
Likes received : 274
Join date : 2014-01-09
Re: Parents withdraw from Lorraine interview
nglfi wrote:I'm much more of a reader now than a poster. I haven't posted in a while but recent events have given me fresh hope. For the first time in years the McCanns are NOT courting attention, in fact actively shying away from it and squirming out of it. There has to be a reason for that. I am so happy for Goncalo Amaral. Someone posted earlier that the recent court decision has nothing to do with their culpability for events but with his freedom of expression. I agree but this decision is also very important for public perception.
Also, if it has ultimately been decided (at the moment) that Amaral has the right to say these things, does that therefore mean that they are not libellous? And does that therefore confirm (although we already knew) that they are factual?
People's opinion may very well change in respect of dog alerts, car hire evidence, timeline discrepancies, behavioural evidence etc
I love how the McCanns won a LIBEL case but Dr. Amaral won a freedom of speech case.
Of course if Amaral's book were untrue it would be libelous and he would have no freedom to express it.
whodunit- Posts : 467
Activity : 913
Likes received : 448
Join date : 2015-02-08
Page 5 of 5 • 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
Similar topics
» All Mccann Video Interviews - Full length
» McCanns on YouTube - List of 40 of the top 100 McCann-sceptic videos on YouTube
» Madeleine McCann Netflix documentary could trigger fresh legal action by parents as Amaral gives interview
» Joana Morais
» McCanns on ITV - Lorraine- Thursday 1 May 2014
» McCanns on YouTube - List of 40 of the top 100 McCann-sceptic videos on YouTube
» Madeleine McCann Netflix documentary could trigger fresh legal action by parents as Amaral gives interview
» Joana Morais
» McCanns on ITV - Lorraine- Thursday 1 May 2014
The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ :: Madeleine Beth McCann :: Madeleine's 1st - 17th year anniversaries
Page 5 of 5
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum