The McCann v Gonçalo Amaral libel trial as it happens.

[Lyall]

Fair to say you don't have a clue then Lyall?

Don't worry neither do I!

More of a clue than if I hadn't read those books though at least

[Angelo222]

really don't see the point in the photo's tbh ...its not telling us anything is it .... 8-)(--)

Oh do get over yourself Beni.  It not as if the great British Press have any today.

[Benita]

Oh do get over yourself Beni.  It not as if the great British Press have any today.

get over yourself angela 

[puglove]

Oh do get over yourself Beni.  It not as if the great British Press have any today.

I know that this isn't my call.....but if some sort of "Everyman" read on here, with all sympathy for a lost child, they might soon have growing doubts about a couple who grab every opportunity to deny culpablity, while making sure that they have sleek hair, immaculate make-up, and always doing that unconvincing hand-holding crap. I see a lot of denial, but none of the loss and despair that Kerry Needham displays. I just can't get my head round them.

[icabodcrane]

Chill shona. No one gives a whatsit what you think. So all is cool.

Well I enjoy shona's input,  and I'm sure I'm not the only member/guest  who does 

She,  unlike some,  is not over-invested  in this case and has no personal axe to grind

shona's opinions are as near as we get to  'neutral observer'  and that is rare and valuable

[Lyall]

I know that this isn't my call.....but if some sort of "Everyman" read on here, with all sympathy for a lost child, they might soon have growing doubts about a couple who grab every opportunity to deny culpablity, while making sure that they have sleek hair, immaculate make-up, and always doing that unconvincing hand-holding crap. I see a lot of denial, but none of the loss and despair that Kerry Needham displays. I just can't get my head round them.

I know what you mean Shona. Right from the very first speech they had a clear strategy that continues to this day, a strategy that appeals to some just as strongly as it repels others. Very few are neutral about their TV appearances I think. They may be neutral about the case,but the TV appearances are always guaranteed to divide opinion.

[puglove]

Well I enjoy shona's input,  and I'm sure I'm not the only member/guest  who does 

She,  unlike some,  is not over-invested  in this case and has no personal axe to grind

shona's opinions are as near as we get to  'neutral observer'  and that is rare and valuable

It's quite reassuring that the likes of Neeley think that I'm a bit of a plum. I can live with that. But....Gerry, on his hols, surrounded by small children, saying "f..k off"...what on earth was he thinking?

[puglove]

Goodness me. I have never ever disrespected you icabodcrane but I think you
are way off target here.

If shona has no experience of this case she should refrain from commenting. IMO.

And what experience of this case do you have, Neeley of the Bailey? Have you found her?

No. And you never will. You haven't got a clue.

None of us have. Or she would have been found by now.

[Benice]

I know that this isn't my call.....but if some sort of "Everyman" read on here, with all sympathy for a lost child, they might soon have growing doubts about a couple who grab every opportunity to deny culpablity, while making sure that they have sleek hair, immaculate make-up, and always doing that unconvincing hand-holding crap. I see a lot of denial, but none of the loss and despair that Kerry Needham displays. I just can't get my head round them.

So if the McCanns appeared looking like a couple of unkempt slobs and instead of holding hands they glared at one-another - you would find them more convincing?   Intriguing.

The true criminal here IS the abductor  which is all the McCanns are saying - and which Kerry Needham recognises.  After all her own son was abducted only because he was alone and unsupervised.   Human error can strike at any time - most times the consequences are negligible, but on very rare occasions they are tragic beyond words to all concerned.     

[icabodcrane]

Goodness me. I have never ever disrespected you icabodcrane but I think you
are way off target here.

If shona has no experience of this case she should refrain from commenting. IMO.

I like shona's  honest,  no-nonsense style of posting,  added to which,  I appreciate the views of those who are not in  one  'camp'  or the other and the objectivity they bring to the forum

[puglove]

So if the McCanns appeared looking like a couple of unkempt slobs and instead of holding hands they glared at one-another - you would find them more convincing?   Intriguing.

The true criminal here IS the abductor  which is all the McCanns are saying - and which Kerry Needham recognises.  After all her own son was abducted only because he was alone and unsupervised.   Human error can strike at any time - most times the consequences are negligible, but on very rare occasions they are tragic beyond words to all concerned.   

Actually, I find very little difference between the McCanns and the Philpotts. Stupid, selfish parents, enjoying themselves.

[Benice]

Actually, I find very little difference between the McCanns and the Philpotts. Stupid, selfish parents, enjoying themselves.

IMo There is no comparison.  One was human error the other was an evil  plan which went wrong.

[puglove]

IMo There is no comparison.  One was human error the other was an evil  plan which went wrong.

I would normally agree.

But Madeleine begged her mum not to leave her crying again.

But still they left her. She was too young to be in charge of Sean and Amelie.

[VIXTE]

I would normally agree.

But Madeleine begged her mum not to leave her crying again.

But still they left her. She was too young to be in charge of Sean and Amelie.

How do you know this, that Madeleine begged?
I thought the report is that Madeleine asked:
'Where were you last night when Sean and I cried?'

[Benice]

I would normally agree.

But Madeleine begged her mum not to leave her crying again. But still they left her. She was too young to be in charge of Sean and Amelie.

No she didn't.    And she was not left in charge.   All three children were left fast asleep and checked regularly.

If Madeline or Sean had cried for any length of time the night before then Rachel Oldfield would have heard them as she was in the next apartment and did not go out that night.