The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Welcome to 'The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann' forum 🌹

Please log in, or register to view all the forums, then settle in and help us get to the truth about what really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann.

Please note that when you register your username must be different from your email address!

Parents withdraw from Lorraine interview

Page 6 of 6 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: Parents withdraw from Lorraine interview

Post by maebee on 02.05.16 1:31

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 .
avatar
maebee
Madeleine Foundation

Posts : 489
Reputation : 87
Join date : 2009-12-03
Location : Ireland

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Parents withdraw from Lorraine interview

Post by loopzdaloop on 02.05.16 1:33

@melisande wrote:
Ladyinred wrote:
@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.
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.

How do you know that OG are not on-side?
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.

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.
avatar
loopzdaloop

Posts : 365
Reputation : 52
Join date : 2013-02-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Parents withdraw from Lorraine interview

Post by loopzdaloop on 02.05.16 1:42

@Realist wrote:
@pennylane wrote:

I've tried to explain that there is a lot of distance between 'accident' and 'murder' 
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. 

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.
avatar
loopzdaloop

Posts : 365
Reputation : 52
Join date : 2013-02-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Parents withdraw from Lorraine interview

Post by aiyoyo on 02.05.16 5:08

@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 big grin

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 !

avatar
aiyoyo

Posts : 9610
Reputation : 321
Join date : 2009-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Parents withdraw from Lorraine interview

Post by Rogue-a-Tory on 02.05.16 9:05

@loopzdaloop wrote:
@melisande wrote:
Ladyinred wrote:
@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.
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.

How do you know that OG are not on-side?
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.

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.
Seriously? OG has leaked all sorts of claptrap over the last 5 years, either through the pink peril or its own spin doctors.
avatar
Rogue-a-Tory

Posts : 528
Reputation : 380
Join date : 2014-09-10

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Parents withdraw from Lorraine interview

Post by Mirage on 02.05.16 9:12

BHH confirmed the imminent arrests reportage live on air. Five Live and around 2014 IIRC. I call that a bit leaky.

Mirage

Posts : 1904
Reputation : 757
Join date : 2013-02-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Parents withdraw from Lorraine interview

Post by nglfi on 02.05.16 9:45

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

nglfi

Posts : 478
Reputation : 215
Join date : 2014-01-09

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Parents withdraw from Lorraine interview

Post by whodunit on 02.05.16 17:10

@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.
avatar
whodunit

Posts : 467
Reputation : 443
Join date : 2015-02-08

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Page 6 of 6 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum