Re: Means and Motive etc

by justagrannynow 1 22.02.10 12:50

Snowy wrote:
justagrannynow 1 wrote: In response to Lynx post yesterday at 7.30pm, I cannot access my response to the OP as I am no longer a member of MM, but as I recall, it was this particular paragraph which caused me the most concern. Apart from the inaccurate description of psychopathy which I have answered in a previous post, the certainty with which Snoop claims that there is no character history to indicate psychopathy, alarmed me.

Psychopathy is an extremely complex condition, difficult to diagnose, requiring a prolonged assessment by a qualified practitioner who would be bound by the medical rule of confidentiality. If Snoop is so certain of his facts because he has access to the medical records, then he is a disgrace to his profession. If not, then he is in no better position than the rest of us who rely on speculation and state our opinions with a tad less pomposity and the occasional IMO. Snoop states these are facts, not opinions. For the sake of a profession which I devoted my working life to, and which I hold in high regard, I do so hope these are not facts.

Let me get this right, you spent your working life in psychiatry and yet actually concurr that the McCanns are, or could be, psychopaths?
I find THAT worrying - that someone supposedly an expert in their field could actually go along with all the tripe that has been written about the Mccanns on the subject of their supposed mental and personal disorders - sociopathy, psycopathy, narcissism, you name it, they are supposed to suffer from it.

It's about time that someone with some actual expereince spoke up and outed this for the total crap it is, rather than just going along with the lame 'well they could be' or dissing others who point out how stupid it all is.

You claim here that psycopathy needs a long period to be diagnosed and it can only be done by trained people.

Excuse me jagn, but isn't it time you used some of your expertise to point out the rubbish that's written about this on other sites? Or are you only interested in criticizing those who say the Mccanns cannot be psychopaths, rather than those who constantly assert like nodding dogs that they are?

I concur that it is possible for any human being to suffer from psychopathy, but that in no way implies that I believe that the McCanns, or any of the holiday group are afflicted with that condition. I do not know them and have no access to their medical records therefore am in no postion to know one way or the other, unlike Snoop.
As for the "rubbish that's written about this on other sites", I have no idea which sites you mean, but what I can say is that you will not be able to produce any posts of mine from anywhere where I have been foolish enough to make a diagnosis on anybody. Usually I avoid all threads discussing analysis of body language/personality disorders etc because I just do not know the people under discussion. The reason I commented on Snoops post on the MM forum and again on here is because members were specifically asked for their opinion on the article, and Snoop expressed certainty about what he was posting rather than speculation, which has to be either misleading or a breach of confidentiality. It is one thing for people to debate with each other as to various possibilities, but it is quite out of order to insist that ones opinion is a fact, no matter how strongly that person believes their opinion to be true.

by Pascal 22.02.10 22:05

aliberte2 wrote:So no One Wishes to Actually take on the Post, because some, Like Pascal, Don't really Like the Poster and Feel It's an Attack. But they Know the McCanns are Lying Anyway.

Sorry Alberte. I don't know what you're on about. Guess you are looking for a fight so just to let you know, I won't be biting.

Snoop is well known to be aggressive and dismissive of any 'anti' viewpoint. Oh and he loves a good scrap.

by aliberte2 23.02.10 1:32

Pascal wrote:
aliberte2 wrote:So no One Wishes to Actually take on the Post, because some, Like Pascal, Don't really Like the Poster and Feel It's an Attack. But they Know the McCanns are Lying Anyway.

Sorry Alberte. I don't know what you're on about. Guess you are looking for a fight so just to let you know, I won't be biting.

Snoop is well known to be aggressive and dismissive of any 'anti' viewpoint. Oh and he loves a good scrap.

And this is Reason To Not Absorb and Respond to this Particular Well Written Post?
Is he a Member HEre Anyway?
Waht Are you Scared Of? being Shown up?

by Pascal 23.02.10 13:28

aliberte2 wrote:
Pascal wrote:
aliberte2 wrote:So no One Wishes to Actually take on the Post, because some, Like Pascal, Don't really Like the Poster and Feel It's an Attack. But they Know the McCanns are Lying Anyway.

Sorry Alberte. I don't know what you're on about. Guess you are looking for a fight so just to let you know, I won't be biting.

Snoop is well known to be aggressive and dismissive of any 'anti' viewpoint. Oh and he loves a good scrap.

And this is Reason To Not Absorb and Respond to this Particular Well Written Post?
Is he a Member HEre Anyway?
Waht Are you Scared Of? being Shown up?

What??!!

I've already commented. I can't offer any more than I have. The only issue I have with the poster, Snoop is that he is overly aggressive. His intelligent, thought provoking posts have been ruined by this character trait, imo. Indeed new 'anti' members on PFA have been cited as 'fresh meat' for him to gorge upon. I've always tried to read his posts objectively, and put aside his apparent and incessant urge to tear other (his opponents) posters' limbs off for mere sport. It would be good to see him apply his logic and skill to ending, once and for all the appalling inter forum attacks where innocent posters get themselves caught up in the fray. He won't. He enjoys the spectacle way too much.

Now. Why do you disguise your posts? What are YOU scared of?

by twinkle 23.02.10 21:11

aliberte2 wrote:
Pascal wrote:
aliberte2 wrote:So no One Wishes to Actually take on the Post, because some, Like Pascal, Don't really Like the Poster and Feel It's an Attack. But they Know the McCanns are Lying Anyway.

Sorry Alberte. I don't know what you're on about. Guess you are looking for a fight so just to let you know, I won't be biting.

Snoop is well known to be aggressive and dismissive of any 'anti' viewpoint. Oh and he loves a good scrap.

And this is Reason To Not Absorb and Respond to this Particular Well Written Post?
Is he a Member HEre Anyway?
Waht Are you Scared Of? being Shown up?

Why would Pascal need to comment further?
Pascal has stated on more than one occasion that she is on the fence regarding this case.

by bunnie1 24.02.10 14:45

Interesting thread.
Would it not have been easier for a group of intelligent people to set the stage up as an unfortunate accident.Let the search and matters fade away.

by WOODWARD 24.02.10 15:19

We dont know the means ,that doesnt mean the means didnt exist,by definition ,if there was no abduction then the" means" clearly did exist,when perpetrators are determined to conceal the"means" and several "means" could exist,any attempt to define them is speculation,it is perfectly usual, in cases where a body has not been recovered that the means of disposal are not firmly established even post conviction.As to" motive",no motive is necessary for a fatal accident,again by definition,and as to the motive for covering up-wilful negligence leading to the death of a child,motive enough for any group of party lovers.

by vaguely1 24.02.10 16:12

and opportunity? While you're on a roll popcornandcola

by bunny 24.02.10 20:26

The means.........that you say are unknown actually means that it was vitally important that 5a was never re rented or at least for a good year IMO.

I beleive Police forces in some cases actually buy the property concerned so they can go back and do further forensics should anymore information come to light. Thats was never going to happen in PDL though never mind

Latest topics