Re: The McCanns Mark 1000 Days

by Autumn 18.01.10 19:41

Ruby wrote:
vaguely1 wrote:
Ruby wrote:vaguely 'I saw David Walliams do it on TV a while back......what should I make of that?'

David Walliams specialises in grotesque and inappropriate characterisations... they're meant to shock, not represent real life. I have shown the Gaspars' statement to many people of all ages and they have all recoiled in discomfort.

Maybe they were shocked you were wondering around with a copy of a police statement in your hand Ruby. (Edited to add:) There are a lot of people, members of the public, who are not used to police statements, and have no idea of the sheer number, or content of statements that the police will have in relation to serious crimes. Most members of the public are lucky to be shielded from the reality of these situations.

So when one person does it it's meant to shock, not represent real life, yet when another does it it's accepted as the opposite.

If you can tell me how rubbing your nipple is linked to child pornography I'll be happy to take on board what you say.

I think when accompanied by his other action and while talking about whether his friend's preschool daughter 'would do this' it's pretty dodgy, but that's just me then, as you were

Maybe we should stand outside the star studded event waving placards giving links to the Gaspars' statement. Afterall, very few of the general public are aware of the contents of the Police Files and would, I am sure, be sickened and shocked on reading the Gaspars' statement.

by nemesis/muratfan 18.01.10 20:46

MaryB wrote:I wouldn't be keen to support any charity associated with them until the case is solved.

You mean unlike giving money to a CONVICTED LIAR, the same one who is facing more than two criminal charges.

by vaguely1 18.01.10 21:12

Autumn wrote:
Ruby wrote:
vaguely1 wrote:
Ruby wrote:vaguely 'I saw David Walliams do it on TV a while back......what should I make of that?'

David Walliams specialises in grotesque and inappropriate characterisations... they're meant to shock, not represent real life. I have shown the Gaspars' statement to many people of all ages and they have all recoiled in discomfort.

Maybe they were shocked you were wondering around with a copy of a police statement in your hand Ruby. (Edited to add:) There are a lot of people, members of the public, who are not used to police statements, and have no idea of the sheer number, or content of statements that the police will have in relation to serious crimes. Most members of the public are lucky to be shielded from the reality of these situations.

So when one person does it it's meant to shock, not represent real life, yet when another does it it's accepted as the opposite.

If you can tell me how rubbing your nipple is linked to child pornography I'll be happy to take on board what you say.

I think when accompanied by his other action and while talking about whether his friend's preschool daughter 'would do this' it's pretty dodgy, but that's just me then, as you were

Maybe we should stand outside the star studded event waving placards giving links to the Gaspars' statement. Afterall, very few of the general public are aware of the contents of the Police Files and would, I am sure, be sickened and shocked on reading the Gaspars' statement.

Do you think that this would help achieve justice in this case Autumn? And do you think it would help the funds of the charities who are included in this event?

I personally rue the day when untrained and unqualified members of the public wave around speculative witness statements to other untrained and unqualified members of the public.

One of these days one of those speculative statements may be describing the actions of you, or I, or people who are dear to us. And undoubtedly those untrained and unqualified members of the public will dribble at the scandal of it all too.

But I'm sure it's a great idea apart from that.

by twinkle 18.01.10 21:45

vaguely1 wrote:
Ruby wrote:vaguely 'I saw David Walliams do it on TV a while back......what should I make of that?'

David Walliams specialises in grotesque and inappropriate characterisations... they're meant to shock, not represent real life. I have shown the Gaspars' statement to many people of all ages and they have all recoiled in discomfort.

Maybe they were shocked you were wondering around with a copy of a police statement in your hand Ruby. (Edited to add:) There are a lot of people, members of the public, who are not used to police statements, and have no idea of the sheer number, or content of statements that the police will have in relation to serious crimes. Most members of the public are lucky to be shielded from the reality of these situations.

So when one person does it it's meant to shock, not represent real life, yet when another does it it's accepted as the opposite.

If you can tell me how rubbing your nipple is linked to child pornography I'll be happy to take on board what you say.

I would be interested in the link here.

by twinkle 18.01.10 21:51

The comparison between the McCanns and the moors murderers is quite hard to stomach for me.
To hold this view would mean that you think the McCanns planned in advance to kill their own daughter.

by Autumn 19.01.10 1:53

twinkle wrote:The comparison between the McCanns and the moors murderers is quite hard to stomach for me.
To hold this view would mean that you think the McCanns planned in advance to kill their own daughter.

Moita Flores: The only thing that was proven was there was NO ABDUCTION

by aliberte2 19.01.10 2:53

But the Prosecutor stated That that Wasn't Proven and Flores is Not an Impartial Witness. IMHO his Nasty Attitude did Amaral no Favors, nor the Fact that he allegedly Has a Madeleine TV special in the Works.

by vaguely1 19.01.10 7:57

Autumn, you place so much faith in the words of others - but only when they speak our mind.

We can all spend all day trumping each other with partial sentences from the libel case - but it doesn't get any nearer finding the truth of what happened to Madeleine.

by Cath 19.01.10 8:14

According to the AG there's no evidence either way.
Turns it all into a matter of opinion.

by Ruby 19.01.10 8:42

But the UK police, including Scotland Yard, shared the Portuguese police's belief that Madeleine is dead. Are you accusing them of not knowing what they're talking about?

by Kololi 19.01.10 15:34

Autumn wrote:
twinkle wrote:The comparison between the McCanns and the moors murderers is quite hard to stomach for me.
To hold this view would mean that you think the McCanns planned in advance to kill their own daughter.

Moita Flores: The only thing that was proven was there was NO ABDUCTION

Hi Autumn
Ok so it was proven that there was no abduction.

Where has it been proven that Mr and Mrs McCann allowed their pervery mates to do unthinkable things to Madeleine and where was it proven that Mr and Mrs McCann stole, abused, tortured, murdered and then buried the bodies of child victims? Apples and pears I am afraid and even though they are not a couple that endear me to them, I can not see how you can liken them to the likes of Myra Hindley - sorry.

Take care

by Pascal 19.01.10 16:43

I don't think anyone of sound mind could liken the McCanns to Hindley and Brady.

It's daft arguments like this that weaken the debate against abduction and give the more extreme McCann supporters ammunition to tar us all with the same toilet brush.

Kololi, you make a lot of sense and I thank you for your posts.

by Autumn 19.01.10 17:24

Autumn wrote:
vaguely1 wrote:I'm sure those charities will benefit greatly. This is good news.

Well, imo, it isn't good news that these charities feel the need to align themselves to Rothley's very own ...................... in order to raise money.

by Autumn 19.01.10 17:34

As you can see, I have amended my original post.

To get back on topic, who will be attending this event?

A few likely attendees -

Fiona Philips
Fern Britton
Tony Parsons
Lorraine Kelly

by Pascal 19.01.10 17:40

You didn't amend this Autumn. [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by Autumn 19.01.10 17:44

Pascal wrote:You didn't amend this Autumn. [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Could you be more specific please?

by Pascal 19.01.10 17:57

'Rothleys very own Hindley and Brady'

You happy with that?

do you not think thats a tad libellous?

by Autumn 19.01.10 18:02

Autumn wrote:
Autumn wrote:
vaguely1 wrote:I'm sure those charities will benefit greatly. This is good news.

Well, imo, it isn't good news that these charities feel the need to align themselves to Rothley's very own ...................... in order to raise money.

As you can see, I have edited my post.

by Pascal 19.01.10 18:09

and you think thats better do you?

jesus wept.

by Autumn 19.01.10 18:30

Autumn wrote:
vaguely1 wrote:I'm sure those charities will benefit greatly. This is good news.

Well, imo, it isn't good news that these charities feel the need to align themselves to Rothley's very own KING AND QUEEN in order to raise money.

With hindsight, I can see how my comments may have upset others and apologise for any offence caused. As stated in an earlier post, I was commenting on the McCanns' public image NOT their actions.

by nemesis/muratfan 19.01.10 18:36

Still some

by Autumn 19.01.10 18:42

The more I think about it the more convinced I am that this event is a PR exercise for the McCanns. I expect they think that Hob nobbing with the rich and famous will boost their flagging popularity. I note that there will be an auction at this 'do' - any suggestions as to what they might put up for auction

by twinkle 19.01.10 22:52

Autumn wrote:
Autumn wrote:
vaguely1 wrote:I'm sure those charities will benefit greatly. This is good news.

Well, imo, it isn't good news that these charities feel the need to align themselves to Rothley's very own KING AND QUEEN in order to raise money.

With hindsight, I can see how my comments may have upset others and apologise for any offence caused. As stated in an earlier post, I was commenting on the McCanns' public image NOT their actions.

Thankyou for that.

by ufercoffy 19.01.10 22:56

Autumn wrote:The more I think about it the more convinced I am that this event is a PR exercise for the McCanns. I expect they think that Hob nobbing with the rich and famous will boost their flagging popularity. I note that there will be an auction at this 'do' - any suggestions as to what they might put up for auction

Their house hopefully. Clearly they can't afford the mortgage payments without public assistance.

by Autumn 22.01.10 11:13

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

From the article in the Leicester Mercury

'The McCanns, from Rothley, are currently embroiled in legal action against former detective Goncalo Amaral in an attempt to ban his book Maddie: The Truth Of The Lie, which claims their daughter is dead.
Mr Amaral was the first head of the Portuguese police investigation into Madeleine's disappearance.
However, he was later taken off the case.'

Nice bit of publicity for Snr Amaral's book.

by marigold 23.01.10 0:37

twinkle wrote:The comparison between the McCanns and the moors murderers is quite hard to stomach for me.
To hold this view would mean that you think the McCanns planned in advance to kill their own daughter.

The fact is that no-one knows. Some parents do plan to kill their children and until there is definitive proof that the Mccanns are innocent (in a court of Law) then this is a possibility. Why the Mccanns should be exempt from speculation as if they are higher beings is a mystery. They are liars and that's a fact. They have a mercenary attitude towards their child which has been evident. Why should we have to believe they are incapable of a much worse crime than already considered? They are no different from any other parents whos child has disappeared in suspicious circumstances. Anything is possible.

by Autumn 26.01.10 21:00

The Formby Times - Susan Healy

TOMORROW will be another landmark day in the search for Madeleine McCann – another chance to raise awareness and keep the missing girl in people’s thoughts.

It will be 1,000 days since the then three-year-old – she will now be six – disappeared while on holiday in Portugal with her parents, Kate and Gerry, and her brother and sister, twins Sean and Amelie.

Millions of words have been written and so much seems to have happened since May 3, 2007 – but, in essence, nothing has happened and nothing has changed.

Madeleine McCann went missing on that date – and she’s still missing.

To mark that cold, cruel fact, 1,000 lanterns will be released at locations across the UK by friends, family and supporters of the McCanns at 7.30pm tomorrow.

Among the locations will be Rothley in Leicestershire, where Kate and Gerry live, and, here in Merseyside, Formby Football Club on Altcar Road, Formby, where 250 lanterns will light up the Merseyside sky.

A club official says the gates will be open by 7pm and parking will be available at and around the ground.

Kate’s mum and dad, Susan and Brian Healy, live in Allerton, and Susan reveals: “We were going to use Mossley Hill Athletics Club, but are not able to because lanterns can be a problem if they are released close to the airport.

“The nearest alternatives were Formby and St Helens and Kate has also got friends in Formby so we decided to do it there.”

While Kate and Gerry will be hosting a dinner in London tomorrow evening to raise funds for the ongoing search for their daughter, Susan and Brian will be in Formby – although those Merseysiders unable to get there are being invited to show their support and solidarity in their own homes.

“The message is for people not to give up on Madeleine,” says Susan.

“It’s sad that it’s a school day and that many children from this area won’t be able to get to Formby, but people can mark the 1,000 days in other ways.

“They don’t need lanterns – they can simply think about Madeleine and have a quiet time of reflection in their own homes.

“Kate will be at her fundraising night in London – God love her, she’s worked so hard on that – but there will also be a lantern release in Rothley.”

While many people around the world will still have a fixed image of Madeleine in their minds – taken before she went missing – we are reminded of the onward march of time by the fact that Kate and Gerry’s twins, Sean and Amelie, will be five on February 1, while Madeleine herself will be seven on May 12.

As we have said before in the ECHO, the future tense is important because, despite the time that has passed, there is no proof the past tense is needed.

Madeleine’s name continues to be mentioned each and every week during the “children’s service” which takes place at 10am on Sundays at Our Lady of the Annunciation, Bishop Eton, in Woolton Road, Childwall.

Meanwhile, on their website, findmadeleine.com, under the heading “Why do we continue?”, Kate and Gerry stress:

“There is absolutely nothing to suggest that Madeleine has been harmed.

How proud you must be of your daughter, Mrs Healy :puke:

Poor Madeleine - her family, the very people whom she should have been able to trust to care for her, have let her down so badly.