More neglect

by **PeterMac** 05.06.11 15:34

p. 111 [Local people and] “British expatriates had organised a search of the area around Luz... The volunteers were joined by most of our family and friends, keen to do something practical to help, while Gerry and I were tied up with Andy Bowes and Alex Woodfall.”

This day provided us with a good example of one of the disadvantages of a large group: unless it is co-ordinated with military precision, people do not always know who is doing what and tasks can skip through the net. When lunchtime came, Gerry and I were in the middle of another meeting when we discovered there was no one around to collect Sean and Amelie. We had to interrupt proceedings and go to the Toddler Club ourselves, phoning round our friends and family en route to try to get somebody who wasn’t too far away to come back and give them their lunch. A classic case of too many cooks. Or in this instance, not enough !"

1 tasks can slip through the net - like collecting children ?
2 what meeting can conceivably have been more important than the welfare and safety of their two remaining twins ?
3 we HAD TO INTERRUPT PROCEEDINGS
4 ...to GET somebody ...to come back and give them their lunch

This incident is reported to have been on Monday 7th May, only 4 days after Madeleine’s alleged disappearance. Already Katey is boasting and joking in a crass and insensitive way about neglecting the welfare of the ones who remain.

Am I alone in finding this shocking in itself, but also finding the inclusion of this incident, written in this way, totally incomprehensible ?

by littlepixie 05.06.11 15:43

It clearly shows what an inconvenience they think their children are. I ran an extremely busy retail outlet when my children were small. The minute they finished school I walked off the counter and my time was theirs. Our holidays were for them.

I read somewhere (think it was ProfilerPatB) that she believes Kate doesnt realise how inappropriate her comments are and I agree. She is so narcissistic she just doesn't realise what she is making herself look like when she opens her mouth.

Eta. She seems to think that her children are everyone elses responsibility. I hope her attitude towards them has changed in the last four years.

by Guest 05.06.11 15:47

PeterMac wrote:p. 111 [Local people and] “British expatriates had organised a search of the area around Luz... The volunteers were joined by most of our family and friends, keen to do something practical to help, while Gerry and I were tied up with Andy Bowes and Alex Woodfall.”

This day provided us with a good example of one of the disadvantages of a large group: unless it is co-ordinated with military precision, people do not always know who is doing what and tasks can skip through the net. When lunchtime came, Gerry and I were in the middle of another meeting when we discovered there was no one around to collect Sean and Amelie. We had to interrupt proceedings and go to the Toddler Club ourselves, phoning round our friends and family en route to try to get somebody who wasn’t too far away to come back and give them their lunch. A classic case of too many cooks. Or in this instance, not enough !"

1 tasks can slip through the net - like collecting children ?
2 what meeting can conceivably have been more important than the welfare and safety of their two remaining twins ?
3 we HAD TO INTERRUPT PROCEEDINGS
4 ...to GET somebody ...to come back and give them their lunch

This incident is reported to have been on Monday 7th May, only 4 days after Madeleine’s alleged disappearance. Already Katey is boasting and joking in a crass and insensitive way about neglecting the welfare of the ones who remain.

Am I alone in finding this shocking in itself, but also finding the inclusion of this incident, written in this way, totally incomprehensible ?

I am totally shocked!! How long does it take to ask someone to pick up the twins? What meeting is so important to forget about you two kids, which I am totally shocked were in the creche anyway when there so many family and friends to look after them Just days after Madeleine went missing, and they entrust their remaining children with people they hardly know?

I can't believe what I have read bigshock

by littlepixie 05.06.11 15:52

That is a good point candyfloss. They didnt know who had "abducted" Maddie, it could have been a creche worker or someone affiliated with the creche, yet they left their two remaining children there rather than leave them with family.

by **PeterMac** 05.06.11 17:15

littlepixie wrote:I read somewhere (think it was ProfilerPatB) that she believes Kate doesnt realise how inappropriate her comments are and I agree. She is so narcissistic she just doesn't realise what she is making herself look like when she opens her mouth.

But this book has been poured over by lawyers, friends, family, press advisors, and the rest, and still Katey is allowed to say this sort of thing. You would have thought that the person who proof read it and corrected the grammar - (since we note that Katey is now apparently able to use nominative and accusative, reflexive and possessive personal pronouns correctly, which neither of them can do except by accident ) - did not say "look this really needs to be either totally re-written or left out". Ditto the dreadful stuff on page 129. What possessed her to include things like this. It adds precisely nothing to the story about the disappearance, and simply invites derision and criticism.

by ufercoffy 05.06.11 17:29

PeterMac wrote:When lunchtime came, Gerry and I were in the middle of another meeting when we discovered there was no one around to collect Sean and Amelie. We had to interrupt proceedings and go to the Toddler Club ourselves...

That's just awful.

Fancy having to collect your own kids yourselves. bigshock

They were DOCTORS for goodness sake!

As I recall they were forever going to the airport to collect friends and relatives, but then just when the friends/rellies were needed to take responsibility for the two kids that weren't abducted no one was around. Hello???? wtf

by Guest 05.06.11 17:53

HELLO, IS THERE ANYONE OUT THERE IN AUTHORITY WHO CAN AND WILL DO SOMETHING TO STOP THESE PEOPLE CONTINUING ALONG THEIR MERRY WAY?????

by Rose58 06.06.11 9:45

What a barmpot.

by **PeterMac** 08.06.11 8:33

p. 147 "On Sunday 20 May, Gerry left for the UK.... I was fine, too. Trish and Sandy were there and I had Amelie and Sean. And Cuddle Cat."

Yes, honestly she does say that.
Just 2 weeks after her daughter had been "abducted" and according to her was in the hands of one of more Pae*** , with unspeakable things being done to her, Katey is able to announce to the world that she was "fine", because she had Cuddle Cat.
Does anyone find this difficult ?

by IAmNotMerylStreep 08.06.11 8:37

PeterMac wrote:p. 147 "On Sunday 20 May, Gerry left for the UK.... I was fine, too. Trish and Sandy were there and I had Amelie and Sean. And Cuddle Cat."

Yes, honestly she does say that.
Just 2 weeks after her daughter had been "abducted" and according to her was in the hands of one of more Pae*** , with unspeakable things being done to her, Katey is able to announce to the world that she was "fine", because she had Cuddle Cat.
Does anyone find this difficult ?

Maybe it's true then that she really did take cuddlecat to work with her. A grown woman who needs a comfort toy. She's a complete fruitcake and thank goodness she's no longer a GP.....who on earth would want her as their doctor?

by Guest 08.06.11 9:20

I wonder if the manufacturers of Cuddlecat are pleased or not with all the unusual publicity that their toy has received over the past 4 years. As for Kate, the way I see it is that she is now trying to portray herself as doing the things that "normal" people would have done in her situation. For example, she now claims that she did look for Madeleine herself though much nearer to the event she agreed that neither she nor Gerry did. As for Cuddlecat, she paraded around ostentatiously with it for a while and recently Amelie has been photographed with another one, held to her face in the same way as her mother did in a photo taken on a beach with Gerry. The jury's out (I hope that one day we will be able to say that in respect of whoever is responsible being brought to trial) as to whether she was genuinely displaying a natural need in wanting to be near her child's favourite toy or whether it was just a cynical ploy to gain more sympathy and attention.

by **PeterMac** 08.06.11 12:17

Let us pray... she never goes back into anaesthetics !

by **PeterMac** 08.06.11 12:20

Or to copy Michael Bentine

"Scalpel,
"Swab.
"Alcohol.
"Forceps,
"Alcohol
"Swab
"Allcohhol
" That liddle thingie with the funny end
"Alcohhhoool
"Cuddle Cat

by lj 09.06.11 3:38

Kate is a true sociopath. I know people think it's a heavy term, but quotes like this make that very clear. She has no idea what a normal moral framework would think. No doubt in the next book (because no one is going to stop her now: another million bucks in the future) this will be addressed.
I know the book has been proofread by many, but who will correct her? The lawyers? It's not a legal issue, so the best they can say is: quotes like this won't help your defense when you stand trial? She is convinced she'll never stand trial. From her family and friends I bet no one has the guts to stand up to her: Kate, the doctor, the mother who suffered to have children and suffers to keep them, Kate the saint who was tortured by the Portuguese, Kate the martyr who could not have sex with Gerry, Kate the spouse who taught Gerry to make love to her.

Common, who can tell her "Kate it shows what a lousy human being you are"?

by Atilliator 09.06.11 4:32

Sorry about the change of avatar, but I didn't have a relevant pic when I put up the last one.

I simply don't understand the attitudes of those who lend these people support. My wife and I, if we went on holiday abroad, left our son back in the UK with grandparents when he was the age of Madeleine and the twins. When he became older, we certainly did take him abroad. If we went out for the evening, we took him with us. There is really no excuse for these people. There are two of them. If it was absolutely necessary to attend the party, one could have gone, leaving the other in the apartment with the kids. They could have swapped roles halfway through the evening, so that they could each have a share of the fun. But, no, they had to attend the party - both of them. And, as so many other people had pointed out, if these folk were working class or underclass, there would be no end to the scorn poured on them.

by **PeterMac** 09.06.11 8:31

lj wrote:Kate is a true sociopath...EDIT but who will correct her? The lawyers? It's not a legal issue, so the best they can say is: quotes like this won't help your defense when you stand trial? .

Or perhaps they are helping her build up to a defence of "unfit to plead".

by lj 11.06.11 13:56

PeterMac wrote:
lj wrote:Kate is a true sociopath...EDIT but who will correct her? The lawyers? It's not a legal issue, so the best they can say is: quotes like this won't help your defense when you stand trial? .
Or perhaps they are helping her build up to a defence of "unfit to plead".

because of the lack of a moral framework?

eta: she shares that with other criminals I mean. More neglect 302873

by russiandoll 16.07.12 11:09

p. 147 "On Sunday 20 May, Gerry left for the UK.... I was fine, too. Trish and Sandy were there and I had Amelie and Sean. And Cuddle Cat."

Numerous photos of Madeleine but none showing her with her beloved cat, easily explained if a night time comforter I guess.

The cat has been elevated to the status of a child. It even merits a sentence of its own and capital letters as if it is a person's name. Though mentioned after the twins, this final neat and to the point sentence actually gives it more of an impact.
It clearly has massive importance to Kate McCann, can anyone remind me please when it was garlanded with a set of rosary beads ?

by pauline 16.07.12 12:34

Atilliator wrote:Sorry about the change of avatar, but I didn't have a relevant pic when I put up the last one.

I simply don't understand the attitudes of those who lend these people support. My wife and I, if we went on holiday abroad, left our son back in the UK with grandparents when he was the age of Madeleine and the twins. When he became older, we certainly did take him abroad. If we went out for the evening, we took him with us. There is really no excuse for these people. There are two of them. If it was absolutely necessary to attend the party, one could have gone, leaving the other in the apartment with the kids. They could have swapped roles halfway through the evening, so that they could each have a share of the fun. But, no, they had to attend the party - both of them. And, as so many other people had pointed out, if these folk were working class or underclass, there would be no end to the scorn poured on them.

The point is they could have had uninterrupted fun with their friends either by using the free evening creche (included in the holiday package price) or by using the paying babysitting service provided by the nannies who minded the children in the day. In the book Kate does not mention the existence of the babysitting service, only dismisses the evening creche as her children fall asleep early, just before the evening creche opened.