What is the lie in Amarals book. The truth of the lie.

[Brietta]

Yes, the things that should have been done - yet wasn't.

If your child had gone - wouldn't you want to know where everyone was.

Especially all the backward and forwards that were done.

Seems not imo - the twins were still put in the creche next day.

       " ... the twins were still put in the creche next day ... " 

I find that in the circumstances, that must surely rank as one of the more bizarre statements I have ever heard.

Not even Amaral used his book to criticise the twins' parents for arranging appropriate cover while they were being interviewed by the police in a police station.
Is it your opinion they should have taken the eighteen month old children to the police station with them?


Amended: to correct the ages of the twins. http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=10458.msg506548#msg506548 ... Which still begs the question ... should these infants have been taken to the police station?

[faithlilly]

       " ... the twins were still put in the creche next day ... " 

I find that in the circumstances, that must surely rank as one of the more bizarre statements I have ever heard.

Not even Amaral used his book to criticise the twins' parents for arranging appropriate cover while they were being interviewed by the police in a police station.
Is it your opinion they should have taken the eighteen month old children to the police station with them?

Didn’t some of the group of friends stay behind to watch the children while the others were being questioned?

[Erngath]

       " ... the twins were still put in the creche next day ... " 

I find that in the circumstances, that must surely rank as one of the more bizarre statements I have ever heard.

Not even Amaral used his book to criticise the twins' parents for arranging appropriate cover while they were being interviewed by the police in a police station.
Is it your opinion they should have taken the eighteen month old children to the police station with them?


Amended: to correct the ages of the twins. http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=10458.msg506548#msg506548 ... Which still begs the question ... should these infants have been taken to the police station?

It's just the continuing criticism of all the decisions made by  Madeleine's parents.

[G-Unit]

Didn’t some of the group of friends stay behind to watch the children while the others were being questioned?

The McCanns were the only couple who went together. The others took turns. I think Dianne and Fiona cared for the McCann children and then Emma Knight took over later; she put them to bed that evening before their parents returned at 8.30 om.

[Robittybob1]

The McCanns were the only couple who went together. The others took turns. I think Dianne and Fiona cared for the McCann children and then Emma Knight took over later; she put them to bed that evening before their parents returned at 8.30 pm.

That was news to me!

[G-Unit]

That was news to me!

Judging by the previous night a brass band wouldn't have disrupted their sleep.

All I wanted at that moment was to see Sean and Amelie. Emma had been looking after them and had not long before put them into their cots, but I went in to see them anyway. My need to be with them outweighed any concerns about disrupting their sleep. [madeleine]

[G-Unit]

       " ... the twins were still put in the creche next day ... " 

I find that in the circumstances, that must surely rank as one of the more bizarre statements I have ever heard.

Not even Amaral used his book to criticise the twins' parents for arranging appropriate cover while they were being interviewed by the police in a police station.
Is it your opinion they should have taken the eighteen month old children to the police station with them?

I thought the twins were twenty six months old.

[kizzy]

It's just the continuing criticism of all the decisions made by  Madeleine's parents.

Isn't that similar to your self E - regarding Goncalo Amaral

[Robittybob1]

I thought the twins were twenty six months old.

I think you are about right, they were born in Feb and the trouble is in May, is that 4 months?  So they could actually be 28 months (2 years plus 4 months)
Correction "I think you are about right, they were born in Feb and the trouble is in May, is that 3 months?  So they could actually be 27 months (2 years plus 3 months)"

[G-Unit]

 

I think you are about right, they were born in Feb and the trouble is in May, is that 4 months?  So they could actually be 28 months (2 years plus 4 months)

Well they weren't 18 months old. They had had their second birthdays and were in the Toddlers 2 creche for children between 2 and 3 years old. It's nor an important point, but it highlights a lack of familiarity with the details of the case.

[kizzy]

Well they weren't 18 months old. They had had their second birthdays and were in the Toddlers 2 creche for children between 2 and 3 years old. It's nor an important point, but it highlights a lack of familiarity with the details of the case.

Vert true G -  especially when the poster was having a go at another poster.

[Brietta]

Vert true G -  especially when the poster was having a go at another poster.

At the moment very happily the centre of my universe is about eighteen months old ... so I won't be opening my wrists about making a simple error which was easily rectified.

It doesn't alter the valid response I made to the original post ... which is what action the poster supposes should have been taken regarding the twins?
Was it appropriate to maintain their routine activities with the other children? ... or should they have been taken to a police station which in all likelihood had no facilities for toddlers?

[kizzy]

At the moment very happily the centre of my universe is about eighteen months old ... so I won't be opening my wrists about making a simple error which was easily rectified.

It doesn't alter the valid response I made to the original post ... which is what action the poster supposes should have been taken regarding the twins?
Was it appropriate to maintain their routine activities with the other children? ... or should they have been taken to a police station which in all likelihood had no facilities for toddlers?

It was the mcns who said maddie had been abducted - they did not know by who.

It could have been an inside job - yet they were quite happy to leave twins again.

Mind you they thought it was a safe place - seems they still thought it was a safe place.

[Brietta]

It was the mcns who said maddie had been abducted - they did not know by who.

It could have been an inside job - yet they were quite happy to leave twins again.

Mind you they thought it was a safe place - seems they still thought it was a safe place.

I doubt it very much that Kate and Gerry could have been "quite happy to leave the twins again" ... do you happen to have a cite which might validate your claim that they were?

Similarly ... can you provide a cite to enable you to state that after Madeleine's disappearance, her parents continued in the belief that Luz "was a safe place".

In the absence of your ability to provide two such cites ... which I do not think you can ... might I suggest you take more care about the content of your posts prior to posting.

[G-Unit]

At the moment very happily the centre of my universe is about eighteen months old ... so I won't be opening my wrists about making a simple error which was easily rectified.

It doesn't alter the valid response I made to the original post ... which is what action the poster supposes should have been taken regarding the twins?
Was it appropriate to maintain their routine activities with the other children? ... or should they have been taken to a police station which in all likelihood had no facilities for toddlers?

There are two possibilities.

1. The PJ requested that both McCanns attended, in which case they could have pointed out that, like their friends, they had children to attend to.

2. The McCanns decided to go together, leaving the twins to be cared for by others.