Comments

View comments: 58 to 28 - 27 to 1
1. 58 Karen says:
   January 10th, 2008 at 12:55 pm

   Cheryl

   Freedom of speech means we’re allowed to disagree and tell you so. You would only lose your freedom of speech if you were censored.

2. 57 jo says:
   January 9th, 2008 at 9:12 pm

   Nicolas Sarkozy Wants A French BBC……

3. 56 Cheryl says:
   January 9th, 2008 at 1:01 pm

   33
   veritablequandary Says:

   January 9th, 2008 at 5:18 am
   32 Cheryl
   January 9th, 2008 at 4:48 am

   __________________

   Rather early for me over here. However, I find it much more comfortable to post my remarks my time than European time so not to be abused, harrassed and shouted down by those much narrow minded . I believe the Right to Free Speech is over in the UK as well as over here. And I also believe Anorak has re-stated over the past few days this site is for those who are anti-mccanns, pro mccanns and those who prefer not to prejudge people until all the FACTS are in stated by the Portugan Police investigating this tragedy.

   ——————-

   Mods and Admin

   Cheryl, if there is seachange in the McCann case, then goodness knows what the reporting restrictions will be , and the speculating ones too.
   The most important thing is the PJ have the right and proper perpetrators, whoever they are and justice is brought for that poor child, and that there is NO miscarriage of justice either for anyone innocently caught up in this ugliness

4. 55 Cheryl says:
   January 9th, 2008 at 12:50 pm

   36
   an observer Says:

   January 9th, 2008 at 5:58 am
   32
   Cheryl Says:

   ____________
   I know they have not and that has frankly puzzled me why not. Advised not to admit that guilt of neglect by a lawyer in case of charges? I don’t know that crossed my mind. However, I have thought long and hard - and in anger at them they could be so irresponsible - what sentence I would give them if a judge and they stood me before me on neglect charges. I would sentence them to whatever amount was in the law for that act of neglect and not in jail serving time but spend that time educating the public, giving seminars, speaking to new parents, expectant parents on their responsibilities as a dedicated responsible parent to that child until the day that child reaches adulthood.

5. 54 lyn says:
   January 9th, 2008 at 9:24 am

   Kate McCann looks like she wants to say something but can’t in the interview. Her speech is a bit flawed here and there too. Wonder what caused that.

6. 53 PeterMac says:
   January 9th, 2008 at 9:01 am

   KMs blog today used “Kate and I” three times. He gets it correct twice, so things are looking up.

7. 52 Anonymous says:
   January 9th, 2008 at 8:19 am

   “But they come from low-copy DNA analysis – a controversial technique based on just a few human cells which was recently branded unreliable by UK police. Last month, Omagh bomb suspect Sean Hoey walked free after a judge decided this type of testing was not at a sufficiently scientific level to be considered evidence. The Association of Chief Police Officers then announced it was suspending use of the technique in criminal inquiries. And the Crown Prosecution Service in England and Wales is reviewing a number of cases in which it was involved. That means the results in Madeleine’s case could probably never be used in court”- Press Report, Tuesday.

   British legal authorities have declared that 21 000 convictions have been obtained using LCN DNA. It is not known how many of these convictions were obtained where a preponderance of the evidence against the accused was derived from LCN DNA. It is statistically probable that there are several hundred rogue convictions among this number - that is , convictions of the innocent. It is not statistically impossible that there are several thousand. Neither ACPO nor the CPS are involved in determining the reliability of these 21 000 convictions. That responsibility will rest with criminal review boards and courts of appeal in Britain, failing which, the European Court of Human Rights.

   The suspects’ guilt or innocence in the case of Madeleine McCann is not to be determined by a British jury, the majority of whose members would typically be incapable of critical reasoning or analysis of evidence and legal argument. It is to be determined by three trained and experienced criminal-law judges, who, if presented with DNA evidence, low copy number or otherwise, will give that evidence the weight and scrutiny it deserves.

8. 51 an observer says:
   January 9th, 2008 at 7:36 am

   41
   Joanie Says:
   ——————
   apologies
   didn’t realise it was marvelously snipped

9. 50 Karen says:
   January 9th, 2008 at 7:35 am

   I think Sledgehammer is Harry Hindsight/Seymour Laws - if his new catchphrase Gone Fishing is anything to go by.

10. 49 Peter O says:
    January 9th, 2008 at 7:34 am

    15 Keesha Says: January 9th, 2008 at 12:17 am
    Mods + Admin

    What is the situation about commenting on forums if charges are made. I’m sure I read
    Peter O saying he would no longer comment because of libel during a criminal case

    Edit…..

    +++++++++++++

    I’m sure I never passed any such comment?

    In general, I think once charges have been brought you do enter a different “legal phase” where somewhat more caution is necessary. Not my area of expertise, other than applying common sense, doubtless one of the legal types will be better placed to comment?

11. 48 Karen says:
    January 9th, 2008 at 7:33 am

    Joanie

    They came across as so callous on that Panorama programme. But according to Allison Pearson in the Daily Mail all the Panorama programme turned up was Kate and Gerry’s anguish.

    Oh, and we’re ghouls who relish their torment - rather than people who think they’re lying, they’re wasting time on pointless P.R. and they were stupid for leaving the doors unlocked.

12. 47 an observer says:
    January 9th, 2008 at 7:33 am

    41
    Joanie Says:
    ——————
    saw it ages ago actually.
    not impressed.

13. 46 Swannie says:
    January 9th, 2008 at 7:31 am

    38
    Joanie:

    Some of us did watch the video - and did get your satire.
    Don’t you think she’d make a good ‘Oddjob’? Excellent hat -throwing skills!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1rQazjM-bCo

14. 45 jo says:
    January 9th, 2008 at 7:31 am

    41
    Joanie Says:
    *******************
    ok…just watched the video while having my cuppa to wake up a bit.
    APOLOGIES.
    Yes,K looks absolutely distressed,concerned and preocupied…..

15. 44 Sam says:
    January 9th, 2008 at 7:22 am

    I watched it and would like to add one of my favorites, watch and please keep those letters and donations coming. Don’t forget to read the comments after the video.

    http://youtube.com/watch?v=vEAySu-hTJo

16. 43 Joanie says:
    January 9th, 2008 at 7:20 am

    Watch the video I have pasted. You will see I am definitely not a pro mcscam.

17. 42 Joanie says:
    January 9th, 2008 at 7:18 am

    39 Observer

    Obviously you didn’t view the video, no rose covered glasses used by mwa.

18. 41 jo says:
    January 9th, 2008 at 7:18 am

    38
    Joanie Says:

    January 9th, 2008 at 6:52 am
    Oh how cruel we are to the mccanns, it was an abduction, plain and simple, a terrible person watching and waiting for that window of opportunity. How can you not agree after viewing this heart wrenching statement by k mccann herself:

    **************
    Oh how cruel THEY are to their missing child: it was an accident,plain and simple,2 terribler parents NOT watching and NOT preocupied at all about their children safety……

19. 40 an observer says:
    January 9th, 2008 at 7:11 am

    38
    Joanie Says:
    ——————
    maybe KM was practicing for her role in the soon to be anounced blockbuster movie “who has TAKEN maddie”.
    have you read that the PJ suspect MM died on or aound 3rd may in 5a or have your rose tinted glasses prevented you from seeing this possibility?

20. 39 Joanie says:
    January 9th, 2008 at 6:52 am

    Oh how cruel we are to the mccanns, it was an abduction, plain and simple, a terrible person watching and waiting for that window of opportunity. How can you not agree after viewing this heart wrenching statement by k mccann herself:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1rQazjM-bCo

21. 38 Sledgehammer says:
    January 9th, 2008 at 6:39 am

    No winners here, but the get the McCanns at any price brigade are way behind, still to prove anything or show any real evidence. The more balanced of us, who would prefer justice to take its course are obvioosly severely rattling the mob mentality of the brigade. Gone fishing.

22. 37 an observer says:
    January 9th, 2008 at 6:15 am

    hi duncan,
    will you be moving this thread to the maddie forum rather than leaving it in twittterings?. we have had threads before which got “filed” away elsewhere and they are not so easy to find unless you know to look outside the maddie forum.
    keep up the good work.

23. 36 an observer says:
    January 9th, 2008 at 5:58 am

    32
    Cheryl Says:
    ——————
    ian may have been a bit excited when he posted his comment. i am sure he will respond in due course. in the meantime i offer this,

    gerry has said “We have been advised our behaviour was legally well within the bounds of responsible parenting…”

    do you believe this is true? is this a good message to send other parents? it is possible the person who gave this advice did so on the assumption the MC’s were are the tapas bar?. it now seems they may well have been at chaplins which is a completely different situation. i wouldn’t condone their behaviour even if they were at the tapas bar never mind chaplins.

    CM also had a go at tarring all british overseas holiday makers. see http://tinyurl.com/2aefck which points to an article in the independent where CM states …

    “It is a British approach to get your children washed, bathed and in bed early in the evening if you can so you can have something of the evening to yourself. That is the British way of doing things. It doesn’t mean it’s wrong. It doesn’t mean it’s right,”

    the inference is clearly so you can go out and make whoopee although he very carefully does not say this. why make the statement otherwise? this statement is absolute rubbish. i am sure he does not speak for all british people.

    cm also states …

    “Nobody feels more guilty than Gerry and Kate over the decision they took jointly to leave their children in that position that night. And they will never forgive themselves. They’ve said this often.

    “Nobody feels more guilty than they that Madeleine was alone when she was taken. However, they felt they had a perfectly proper system of checking (her in place).”

    i for one cannot recall one single instance when the MC’s have stated in a forthright and unambiguous manner that they stuffed up big time and regret it. i would like to see some nice simple words of apology / regret not dressed up in their self serving, ass covering double talk. it would also be nice to hear it from them rather than one of their spokespersons.

24. 35 DuncanR says:
    January 9th, 2008 at 5:41 am

    Cheryl

    I have posted a reply to you comment re Dr Watson on the other thread -

    Madeleine McCann: Her Blood, Official Tabloid News And Michaela Walczuch Denies

25. 34 hannasus says:
    January 9th, 2008 at 5:20 am

    23 - Matt,
    Went to look at his blog.
    Came up with first Page. Maddies Xmas appeal.
    Excuse me but you kiss the popes hand and you call it Xmas. I am not a Christian but I know that those that believe call it Christmas. Xmas is the short term that shops and catalog’s use. Oh of course it’s the Maddie fund. MOney Money Money.

26. 33 veritablequandary says:
    January 9th, 2008 at 5:18 am

    32 Cheryl
    January 9th, 2008 at 4:48 am

    __________________
    Ian, I stand firmly on my belief that it was neglect on their part to leave those wee ones alone while they were out. However, I can’t find anywhere, after much searching, that they have suggested that we all abandon our kids with the the totally unacceptable lack of judgment displayed by them. Would you kindly refer me to the link and or newspaper where they are stated as suggesting that to all of us directly?

    —
    Cheryl, give it up, go to bed.

27. 32 Cheryl says:
    January 9th, 2008 at 4:48 am

    14
    Ian Says:

    January 9th, 2008 at 12:15 am
    The Mail says this…

    ‘But the overwhelming public mood - particularly among parents of young children - has been one of compassion’

    Oh really? I dont think so! Everyone I know was FURIOUS at the McCanns suggestion that we all abandoned our kids with the totally unacceptable lack of judgement displayed by the McCann ‘loving family unit’ (especially for a GP and a Consultant!).

    __________________
    Ian, I stand firmly on my belief that it was neglect on their part to leave those wee ones alone while they were out. However, I can’t find anywhere, after much searching, that they have suggested that we all abandon our kids with the the totally unacceptable lack of judgment displayed by them. Would you kindly refer me to the link and or newspaper where they are stated as suggesting that to all of us directly?

28. 31 Cheryl says:
    January 9th, 2008 at 3:23 am

    Matt, I did read the blog you spoke of once I read what you said, and I do agree with him totally. Europe is why behind us in how we find children missing. Below is an article on John Walsh and how he has changed this country in our protecting young children and/or finding young children missing and reasons why he has dedicated the last 24 years of his life doing just that. As an aside, since it isn’t said below, he and his wife were on vacation when their young child was taken.

    “July 27, 2006 will go down in history as the day that changed how America protects its children from sexual predators. At a ceremony in the Rose Garden, President George W. Bush signed a new, tough-as-nails law to track and apprehend convicted sex offenders who disappear after their release from prison. The date wasn’t chosen randomly. It was exactly 25 years earlier that John Walsh and his wife Revé suffered the most horrendous loss that any parents could endure: the abduction and murder of their beautiful six-year-old son, Adam. Since that day in 1981, John has dedicated himself to fighting on behalf of children and all crime victims. As a result, thousands of victims have found justice, and dozens of abducted children have been safely brought home. The new law signed by President Bush is also a result of John’s fight. It’s called “The Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act.”

    Most people know Walsh as the dedicated host of “America’s Most Wanted” (amw.com), the man whose groundbreaking television program has helped take down nearly 1,000 dangerous fugitives in the past 20 years. But it’s not the career that he envisioned for himself. Born in Auburn, New York and educated at the University of Buffalo, Walsh moved to Florida with his wife Revé, and was living the American Dream. He was a successful businessman, building high-end luxury hotels and building his life. But after Adam’s murder, everything changed.

    ——————————————————————————–

    John Walsh Photo Gallery

    ——————————————————————————–

    The Walsh family’s tragic story woke up a nation to the danger of child predators after NBC aired two movies about their life. “Adam,” in 1983, and “Adam: His Song Continues” in 1986, dramatized the incredible heartbreak and then resilience of the Walshes. In a bold and courageous move, the network ran a roll call of missing children at the end of the movies, leading to the recovery of 65 children.

    John and Revé Walsh’s experience taught them that the nation was in desperate need of leadership in the fight to protect children, and they decided to create something positive out of their personal tragedy. From the ad hoc organization they put together to help with the search for Adam, they established the Adam Walsh Child Resource Center, which eventually merged with the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children (NCMEC), which they co-founded in 1984. The NCMEC (missingkids.com / 1-800-THE LOST) provides invaluable resources to parents, children and law enforcement in the United States and internationally. The charity consistently receives an A+ rating for its ability to spend more than 90 cents of every dollar raised on programming. Its incredible public/private partnerships keep the NCMEC as a leading example of a highly respected and effective non-profit.

    Walsh’s search for justice and his determination to never let Adam’s death have been in vain led him to fight back like few other Americans ever have. Although he’s never held political office, Walsh has been the driving force behind major pieces of child protection legislation. This hard work led to Walsh being honored five times by four presidents; Ronald Reagan (twice), George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton, and George W. Bush. One of Walsh’s proudest moments was when he and his wife Revé stood beside President George W. Bush, as the “Adam Walsh Child Protection & Safety Act” was signed into law on the 25th anniversary of Adam’s murder.

    Although the Walshes have never gotten justice in their own case, thousands of crime victims have, thanks to John and Revé’s never ending dedication to fighting back. Law enforcement has also embraced Walsh. He’s been honored numerous times by many local, state and federal agencies. In addition to being named “Man Of The Year” by both the US Marshals and the FBI, the US Marshals also made Walsh an honorary Marshal. Walsh is only the third man to have received this honor in the organization’s two hundred year history.

    Walsh is the best-selling author of three books: Tears Of Rage, No Mercy & Public Enemies.

    He also recently teamed up with the creator of “Baby Einstein,” Julie Clark, to create a series of DVDs called “The Safe Side.” The two DVDs, “Stranger Safety” and “Internet Safety” (thesafeside.com), have been lauded as exceptional resources for parents and kids in dealing with predators in the real world and online.

    John Walsh lives in Washington, D.C. with his wife Revé. They were blessed with three more children after Adam: Meghan, Callahan and Hayden.”

29. 30 Cheryl says:
    January 9th, 2008 at 3:17 am

    29
    Ferdinand Says:

    January 9th, 2008 at 2:47 am
    28 Cheryl Says:

    “This is not the first person over the months I’ve read saying they’d made a statement to the police but never heard back.”

    What would you expect? The police takes the statement. The story about the orphanage is easy to verify. The police has either not found out who this person was, or they have found out and he was indeed collecting for an orphanage.
    ___________________

    I don’t believe this is the one a person from the orphanage approached - was that not a man who reported that?

30. 29 Ferdinand says:
    January 9th, 2008 at 2:47 am

    28 Cheryl Says:

    “This is not the first person over the months I’ve read saying they’d made a statement to the police but never heard back.”

    What would you expect? The police takes the statement. The story about the orphanage is easy to verify. The police has either not found out who this person was, or they have found out and he was indeed collecting for an orphanage.

31. 28 Cheryl says:
    January 9th, 2008 at 2:37 am

    Noted this appeared in the MIrror today/tonight:

    New lead on Madeleine
    EXCLUSIVE
    By Will Payne And Ryan Parry In Praia Da Luz 08/01/2008

    A second British tourist has reported seeing a mystery man hanging around Madeleine McCann’s holiday flat just days before she vanished.

    Gail Cooper, 50, said she was confronted by the “creepy” stranger at her holiday villa in Portugal.

    He claimed he was collecting for an orphanage in the next village of Espiche.

    She spotted him again two days later on Praia Da Luz beach. Gail, from Newark, Notts, said yesterday: “He was a horrible-looking man, really creepy, unkempt and dirty.

    Advertisement
    “He definitely wasn’t Portuguese. He scared me.”

    Gail’s sighting came after the Mirror revealed yesterday that tourist Paul Gordon also spotted a mystery stalker skulking around the holiday complex. Brewery executive Paul confronted the man and was told the same story about the orphanage.

    Gail reported the man to police after she arrived home and read about Madeleine’s disappearance.

    They took a statement from her but Gail added: “I didn’t hear anything back, but I’m so sure this man had something to do with Madeleine’s disappearance.”

    Last night, the McCanns’ spokesman Clarence Mitchell said both reports were being investigated.

    I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT ON THE ABOVE:

    This is not the first person over the months I’ve read saying they’d made a statement to the police but never heard back.

    Now, does the man looking ‘creepy’ and making the woman think he had something to do with that young child’s disappearance make it true? No, but could it be possible?

    Last week over here a young woman was hiking with her dog and last seen talking with a ‘creepy’ man walking along with his dog. Since that sighting she disappeared and wasn’t seen since. Police started looking for this ‘creepy’ man, per other people having said they saw him with her, they found him - he has now been charged with her death - they took him in for questioning and he took them to where he put her body - brutalized and decapitated up the mountains. Further, in looking into the disappearance of a couple in that same area months ago and to no avail in finding them; they now have realized the similarity in him and his having been in the same area as they were. Now, he is being questioned on that couple’s disappearance.

    Back to the movie being talked about - I’ve searched all articles on it I could find and all I could find is “sources close to the McCanns are saying” - it seems all speculations on them come from ’sources’ in the papers or on forums. I can’t find CM’s statement on the supposed movie, though, if anyone cares to give the paper and link he is directly stated on re the movie.

    I prefer to stand firm on there are always two sides to every story until the Police tell me which story is correct.

View comments: 58 to 28 - 27 to 1