Mikaeel Kular

Newintown wrote:

suzyjohnson wrote:

Newintown wrote:

Why would a mother want to visit a grave of a child they've let die or murdered, it seems unreal to me, the only reason I can think of is to make sure that that site hasn't been disturbed and they can carry on their life as if nothing has happened.  Oh dear, after typing that, another case comes to mind .....

A parent who has made a terrible mistake, either by not supervising a child, by letting them down badly in some way, or by losing their temper and causing a fatal injury would I think feel terrible guilt and still love and miss their child desperately, and so yes I do think they would want to have a grave close by that they could visit.

By not supervising a child or losing your temper and causing a fatal injury (none of which are a terrible mistake in your eyes) as you say would make the parent feel terrible guilt, I really don't think so.  Why would they do it in the first place if they have any feelings for the child?

Sorry, I can't agree with your way of thinking.

confusion wrote:I agree the comment 4 days was strange on instagram, not sure if it was about her or the little boy?

Goncalo Amaral might therefore consider himself in a position to learn from a mistake or two: a mistaken (although entirely sensible) assumption on the part of Scottish community members, police and populace alike, that little Mikaeel was wandering in the wilderness, and a view which he and his former police colleagues once shared – that Madeleine McCann suffered an accident on the night of Thursday 3 May, 2007. But who actually put the McCann children to bed that Thursday night?

KM (statement to police, 6.9.07): 'They also kissed Madeleine, who was already lying down. She was under the covers, she thinks, because it was a bit cold... She remained lying down on her left side, with the soft toy and a pink blanket, which she thinks was covering her.'

GM (from the documentary, Madeleine Was Here):"So, I actually came in and Madeleine was just at the top of the bed here, where I'd left her lying and the covers were folded down and she had her cuddle cat and blanket, were just by her head."

KM (6.9.07): 'After Gerry arrived the children went to brush their teeth and she then read them another story, this time all four of them sitting on Madeleine's bed. She thinks that Gerry entered the room, but does not recall him sitting on the bed.… she thinks that Gerry was in the room, and each one of them, the deponent and Gerry, placed a twin in its cot at the same time, between Madeleine's bed and the bed under the window. They also kissed Madeleine, who was already lying down.'

GM (statement to police, 10.5.07): 'At around 19H00, he made his way to the apartment, finding Kate and the children playing on the sofa. About 10 to 15 minutes later, they took the children to the bedroom and they all sat on Madeleine's bed to read a story.'

KM (6.9.07): 'They talked while they drank, until they left for the Tapas restaurant at around 8.30-8.35 p.m. Before leaving they checked on the children, she doesn't know who; however Gerry says it was him. She only knows the children were quiet. She doesn't know if they were in their same positions. She says she is sure that they were asleep, because Gerry told her so and all was quiet.'

PeterMac wrote:Comparisons by Dr Roberts
Last person to see alive,
Person who reported . .  etc

KM (6.9.07): 'They talked while they drank, until they left for the Tapas restaurant at around 8.30-8.35 p.m. Before leaving they checked on the children, she doesn't know who; however Gerry says it was him. She only knows the children were quiet. She doesn't know if they were in their same positions. She says she is sure that they were asleep, because Gerry told her so and all was quiet.'

russiandoll wrote:1. I read on this thread re the father being Pakistani. I read in a newspaper that he was African and the name given certainly sounded African.
 2.  Someone mentioned a claim of abduction, iirc this was stated by a missing person's expert with Lord knows what background who said that given the little lad was unlikely to put clothes on over his pj's before opening that very heavy door, [I agree he would have no weather foresight at his age] , and that as far as I know no other person, mother, family member, neighbours, police, once mentioned a scenario where a stranger had entered, taken the boy and left with him. The claim by mother was put to bed, discovered not at home next morning.

 Can we have clarity re the sub judice rule please admin? I thought it was more than being careful about what was discussed, I thought that there was to be no discussion at all once the legal process was underway, that is once charges were laid....in order to prevent prejudicing a trial.

russiandoll wrote:1. I read on this thread re the father being Pakistani. I read in a newspaper that he was African and the name given certainly sounded African.

PeterMac wrote:Does anyone follow and / or take screenshots of the Official Find Madeleine Facebook site ?
There is talk that messages about Michaeel were suddenly whooshed, and that now no comments are allowed
One can obviously understand why

tiny wrote:

PeterMac wrote:Does anyone follow and / or take screenshots of the Official Find Madeleine Facebook site ?
There is talk that messages about Michaeel were suddenly whooshed, and that now no comments are allowed
One can obviously understand why

If the ofm are so sure the mccanns are innocent and have proof of an abduction,why would they woosh all comments on Michaeel,
to my mind the people of ofm have doubts about the mccanns version of events but they cant bring themselves to admit it.

aquila wrote:As I see things, there's a dead little three year old. The mother has been charged and will appear before the Sheriff on Monday.

I can see no reason to speculate on anything at all - and that removes any need for explanation with regards to sub judice rules - not that anyone on this forum knows about this stuff or if they do they're not telling.

The fact is (and it's only my opinion) that what happened to this child is now in the hands of the police and the courts. I see no benefit in speculation on the case and I think to do so shows total disregard for the judicial process and lack of respect for the life of a babe that's been taken.

Now I know my comment won't make me popular but I fail to see the need to scrutinize the case at this stage. This is a live case at the beginning of the process of possible prosecution. If one single comment could be used to jeopardise that process then we have all failed a little boy whose life has been snuffed out and I believe this forum to be a good place where people care.

God rest the soul of little Mikaael Kular.

Just my opinion.

aquila wrote:As I see things, there's a dead little three year old. The mother has been charged and will appear before the Sheriff on Monday.

I can see no reason to speculate on anything at all - and that removes any need for explanation with regards to sub judice rules - not that anyone on this forum knows about this stuff or if they do they're not telling.

The fact is (and it's only my opinion) that what happened to this child is now in the hands of the police and the courts. I see no benefit in speculation on the case and I think to do so shows total disregard for the judicial process and lack of respect for the life of a babe that's been taken.

Now I know my comment won't make me popular but I fail to see the need to scrutinize the case at this stage. This is a live case at the beginning of the process of possible prosecution. If one single comment could be used to jeopardise that process then we have all failed a little boy whose life has been snuffed out and I believe this forum to be a good place where people care.

God rest the soul of little Mikaeel Kular.

Just my opinion.

aquila wrote:As I see things, there's a dead little three year old. The mother has been charged and will appear before the Sheriff on Monday.

I can see no reason to speculate on anything at all - and that removes any need for explanation with regards to sub judice rules - not that anyone on this forum knows about this stuff or if they do they're not telling.

The fact is (and it's only my opinion) that what happened to this child is now in the hands of the police and the courts. I see no benefit in speculation on the case and I think to do so shows total disregard for the judicial process and lack of respect for the life of a babe that's been taken.

Now I know my comment won't make me popular but I fail to see the need to scrutinize the case at this stage. This is a live case at the beginning of the process of possible prosecution. If one single comment could be used to jeopardise that process then we have all failed a little boy whose life has been snuffed out and I believe this forum to be a good place where people care.

God rest the soul of little Mikaeel Kular.

Just my opinion.

daffodil wrote:

aquila wrote:As I see things, there's a dead little three year old. The mother has been charged and will appear before the Sheriff on Monday.

I can see no reason to speculate on anything at all - and that removes any need for explanation with regards to sub judice rules - not that anyone on this forum knows about this stuff or if they do they're not telling.

The fact is (and it's only my opinion) that what happened to this child is now in the hands of the police and the courts. I see no benefit in speculation on the case and I think to do so shows total disregard for the judicial process and lack of respect for the life of a babe that's been taken.

Now I know my comment won't make me popular but I fail to see the need to scrutinize the case at this stage. This is a live case at the beginning of the process of possible prosecution. If one single comment could be used to jeopardise that process then we have all failed a little boy whose life has been snuffed out and I believe this forum to be a good place where people care.

God rest the soul of little Mikaael Kular.

Just my opinion.

I completely agree aquila.   Now the police process has begun it must run it's course, and any comment, discussion, opinion or speculation  is unwarranted and inappropriate.

Bellisa wrote:Petermac On the ofm fb they took down all the appeals for Mikaeel yesterday yesterday and it wasn't until maybe 6hours later they put their update. Agree about comments but could that be due to mother detained and proceedings beginning?

I also find it curious that Missing People(fb page),have not as of last night put any updates on Mikaeel.

Are they not a leading charity in UK?

Bellisa wrote:Not sure tiny but I would think as a big charity with a prominent ambassador and who post regular updates on their page that they should acknowledge poor Mikaeel.

Ps. agree Aquila