UK Justice Forum 🇬🇧
Disappeared and Abducted Children and Young Adults => Madeleine McCann (3) disappeared from her parent's holiday apartment at Ocean Club, Praia da Luz, Portugal on 3 May 2007. No trace of her has ever been found. => Topic started by: faithlilly on July 30, 2013, 12:47:35 AM
-
From the Sunday Mirror
28 July 2013
By Carole Malone
Gerry Shows He Needs Us
Gerry McCann says he and his wife Kate try to keep the lives of their twins, eight-year-old Amelie and Sean. “as normal as possible”. Which seems at odds with his decision last week to do a big “exclusive” interview with a tabloid newspaper.
Even more odd that Gerry, a leading light in the Hacked-Off campaign, should choose to talk to papers in this particular branch of the media considering his claims that his family have been hounded and vilified by them
Even so he and his wife Kate never seem to miss an opportunity to court publicity when they need to raise money. This time it’s because Gerry is taking part in the Virgin Active London Triathlon which is raising money for the Missing People charity. Did the newspaper involved make a donation to the charity? If so, is Gerry McCann right to take money from newspapers he claims have caused his family distress?
Is it not hypocrisy to ask people, through those newspapers, to sponsor him and give money?
And while I understand why he wants to raise cash for Missing People it would be nice if at some point Gerry McCann acknowledged the media’s positive role in keeping the hunt for Madeleine in the news. Yes certain newspapers acted shamefully but the McCanns were compensated to the tune of £550,000 for that.
But the majority are - and always have been - on their side. And without the support of the media, without the constant stream of stories about the hunt for Madeleine the much needed funds to help find her would have dried up years ago.
-
This journalist shows you can believe the doxa and be critical. It's no surprise
Mr McCann wants the cake and eat it. He thinks that smart ones can achieve that. Is he smart enough ?
-
This journalist shows you can believe the doxa and be critical. It's no surprise
Mr McCann wants the cake and eat it. He thinks that smart ones can achieve that. Is he smart enough ?
Seems not Anne. You know the old adage, you can fool some of the people some of the time...........!!!
-
It seems Carole Malone has no idea of the legacy left over from the disgusting lies that were printed about the McCanns in the newspapers. She seems to think it all ended with a £500,00 payout - when in reality they spawned many of the [ censored word ]s who continue daily to abuse the McCanns in the same way the newspapers did.
She should try writing an article in support of the McCanns and will quickly find herself villified insulted and screeched at with a level of venom that will probably take her breath away.
The McCanns have no problem with newspapers, but they DO had a big problem with irresponsible reporting which can devastate the lives of innocent people.
Carole Malone also avoids mentioning the fact that the McCann name does sell newspapers. This is obvious from the re-cycled articles that frequently appear, which are not at the behest of the McCanns - it is also obvious from the fact that she herself is writing about them. Would she be doing that if there was no benefit to the Sunday Mirror sales figures and thereby indirectly to herself. Maybe she should check the meaning of the word 'Hypocrite'.
-
It seems Carole Malone has no idea of the legacy left over from the disgusting lies that were printed about the McCanns in the newspapers. She seems to think it all ended with a £500,00 payout - when in reality they spawned many of the [ censored word ]s who continue daily to abuse the McCanns in the same way the newspapers did.
She should try writing an article in support of the McCanns and will quickly find herself villified insulted and screeched at with a level of venom that will probably take her breath away.
The McCanns have no problem with newspapers, but they DO had a big problem with irresponsible reporting which can devastate the lives of innocent people.
Carole Malone also avoids mentioning the fact that the McCann name does sell newspapers. This is obvious from the re-cycled articles that frequently appear, which are not at the behest of the McCanns - it is also obvious from the fact that she herself is writing about them. Would she be doing that if there was no benefit to the Sunday Mirror sales figures and thereby indirectly to herself. Maybe she should check the meaning of the word 'Hypocrite'.
You need a sense of perspective here.
It wasn't the Mccanns lives ruined, it was Madeleine's, through the inadequacies and stupidity of her parents.
-
You need a sense of perspective here.
It wasn't the Mccanns lives ruined, it was Madeleine's, through the inadequacies and stupidity of her parents.
no the person/persons who committed the crime are the people who are to be blamed and vilified ,
If it ever is proved that the parents killed/disposed of their daughter and have lied for 6 years then they deserve the wrath of whatever comes their way.
Their choice of babysitting that night is wrong but they did not deserve to have their child snatched because of it and the person who did it is the persons that deserves the anger and attack
The McCann's will live ever with the nightmare of that night - but they are victims of whoever committed this act
-
no the person/persons who committed the crime are the people who are to be blamed and vilified ,
If it ever is proved that the parents killed/disposed of their daughter and have lied for 6 years then they deserve the wrath of whatever comes their way.
Their choice of babysitting that night is wrong but they did not deserve to have their child snatched because of it and the person who did it is the persons that deserves the anger and attack
The McCann's will live ever with the nightmare of that night - but they are victims of whoever committed this act
However, there is a fatal flaw in your reply.
There is no proof that Madeleine was snatched, so unless real evidence comes to light, 'snatching ' is no more than supposition.
-
However, there is a fatal flaw in your reply.
There is no proof that Madeleine was snatched, so unless real evidence comes to light, 'snatching ' is no more than supposition.
the case has never been to court so there is no proof of anything - the only way things can be proved is in front of a judge and jury
However I am a great believer in innocent until proven guilty - it forms the basis of our judicial system. So until the McCann's are proved to be guilty I believe them to be innocent.
Likewise until an abductor is proved in a court to be guilty then that scenario as you say is a theory or an opinion however strong our belief is.
The only 100% thing we can say is Madeleine is missing - there is no " proof " of anything - so any statement is always going to be challenged with the " no proof " ideology .
The fact that the McCann's have never been arrested - even now indicates to me that there is PROBABLY nothing that indicates their potential guilt of a crime. However until the mystery is solved one way or another then all we can do is voice opinions and thoughts on the matter
-
the case has never been to court so there is no proof of anything - the only way things can be proved is in front of a judge and jury
However I am a great believer in innocent until proven guilty - it forms the basis of our judicial system. So until the McCann's are proved to be guilty I believe them to be innocent.
Likewise until an abductor is proved in a court to be guilty then that scenario as you say is a theory or an opinion however strong our belief is.
The only 100% thing we can say is Madeleine is missing - there is no " proof " of anything - so any statement is always going to be challenged with the " no proof " ideology .
The fact that the McCann's have never been arrested - even now indicates to me that there is PROBABLY nothing that indicates their potential guilt of a crime. However until the mystery is solved one way or another then all we can do is voice opinions and thoughts on the matter
On those points I completely agree with you.
-
She seems to think it all ended with a £500,00 payout -
I don't think she does and I don't think it did. There's a rest, something left behind. The fact they took the money means the issue was resolved. How could it be if it was what it pretended to be? Refusing the money and going to Court for the sake of principles that exceeded their case would have been greeted with a certain admiration and had marked a move in the relations between the media and the public. Knowing the money would have gone to the Fund, they likely had received honorable financial supports if they had shown as well more discernment when selecting their PIs.
-
Carole Malone also avoids mentioning the fact that the McCann name does sell newspapers. This is obvious from the re-cycled articles that frequently appear, which are not at the behest of the McCanns
You don't know that to be true Bernice, unless you're one of the people involved.
-
I don't think she does and I don't think it did. There's a rest, something left behind. The fact they took the money means the issue was resolved. How could it be if it was what it pretended to be? Refusing the money and going to Court for the sake of principles that exceeded their case would have been greeted with a certain admiration and had marked a move in the relations between the media and the public. Knowing the money would have gone to the Fund, they likely had received honorable financial supports if they had shown as well more discernment when selecting their PIs.
Where do you get this rubbish from, Anne?
The money went to the Fund.
Had they NOT accepted a payment, there would have been two obvious results:
1) The fund, already seriously depleted would have remained so.
Don't kid yourself that they would have received donations to anything remotely like £550,000. Maybe a few, but not many. In fact maybe none, cos people would be annoyed that they hadn't accepted the sums awarded them
2) If they hadn't accepted the Court settlement, that would have been seen as Carte Blanche for every nasty paper to carry on vilifying them
-
It seems Carole Malone has no idea of the legacy left over from the disgusting lies that were printed about the McCanns in the newspapers. She seems to think it all ended with a £500,00 payout - when in reality they spawned many of the [ censored word ]s who continue daily to abuse the McCanns in the same way the newspapers did.
She should try writing an article in support of the McCanns and will quickly find herself villified insulted and screeched at with a level of venom that will probably take her breath away.
The McCanns have no problem with newspapers, but they DO had a big problem with irresponsible reporting which can devastate the lives of innocent people.
Carole Malone also avoids mentioning the fact that the McCann name does sell newspapers. This is obvious from the re-cycled articles that frequently appear, which are not at the behest of the McCanns - it is also obvious from the fact that she herself is writing about them. Would she be doing that if there was no benefit to the Sunday Mirror sales figures and thereby indirectly to herself. Maybe she should check the meaning of the word 'Hypocrite'.
Agreed. I wonder how many people were swayed, and remained swayed, by that shocking "Corpse in Car" headline in the Express.
It's a shame the UK press didn't learn their lesson from the McCann payout. Chris Jeffries was also treated in a disgusting way by them.
-
On those points I completely agree with you.
quote from South of the River - which you claim to completely agree with:-
''However until the mystery is solved one way or another then all we can do is voice opinions and thoughts on the matter''
Unquote
If you genuinely agree with that comment Stephen - then perhaps you should refrain from attacking, sneering at - and insulting all those who voice different opinions and thoughts to yours.
-
quote from South of the River - which you claim to completely agree with:-
''However until the mystery is solved one way or another then all we can do is voice opinions and thoughts on the matter''
Unquote
If you genuinely agree with that comment Stephen - then perhaps you should refrain from attacking, sneering at - and insulting all those who voice different opinions and thoughts to yours.
I find that comment completely hypocritical when mccann supporters on here sneer at me and others.
Double standards yet again.
Just practice what you preach.
-
Where do you get this rubbish from, Anne?
The money went to the Fund.
Had they NOT accepted a payment, there would have been two obvious results:
1) The fund, already seriously depleted would have remained so.
Don't kid yourself that they would have received donations to anything remotely like £550,000. Maybe a few, but not many. In fact maybe none, cos people would be annoyed that they hadn't accepted the sums awarded them
2) If they hadn't accepted the Court settlement, that would have been seen as Carte Blanche for every nasty paper to carry on vilifying them
But if they had gone to court with as cast iron a case as we are led to believe they had surely they would have received a judgement in their favour with the added bonus of a payment that was substantially greater than the one they received, the newspaper industry would have been cowed by the size of the payout and the McCanns, once and for all would be judicially shown to be the innocent victims they had always claimed to be.
-
But if they had gone to court with as cast iron a case as we are led to believe they had surely they would have received a judgement in their favour with the added bonus of a payment that was substantially greater than the one they received, the newspaper industry would have been cowed by the size of the payout and the McCanns, once and for all would be judicially shown to be the innocent victims they had always claimed to be.
So why didn't those papers request a full-blown trial?
-
You don't know that to be true Bernice, unless you're one of the people involved.
Why do you think that newspapers would not print articles about the McCanns whenever they wanted to? They don't need the McCann's permission. There have been many articles posted recently which are obviously just a re-jig of old news being recycled.
There is only one reason why they do that. It's because the McCann name sells newspapers. The press are in business to make money so what other reason could there be,
-
So why didn't those papers request a full-blown trial?
Because their financial interest was in that off court settlement. They sold more papers publishing their sorry words and then the comments on it, etc. !
It was a win win money operation.
-
So why didn't those papers request a full-blown trial?
The cost perhaps ?
-
Why do you think that newspapers would not print articles about the McCanns whenever they wanted to? They don't need the McCann's permission. There have been many articles posted recently which are obviously just a re-jig of old news being recycled.
There is only one reason why they do that. It's because the McCann name sells newspapers. The press are in business to make money so what other reason could there be,
Stories about Casey Anthony also sell newspapers and I would suspect for the same reason, morbid curiosity.
-
Why do you think that newspapers would not print articles about the McCanns whenever they wanted to? They don't need the McCann's permission. There have been many articles posted recently which are obviously just a re-jig of old news being recycled.
There is only one reason why they do that. It's because the McCann name sells newspapers. The press are in business to make money so what other reason could there be,
It's Mitchell's job? That's what he does. All day, every day - he courts the press and other media.
-
It seems Carole Malone has no idea of the legacy left over from the disgusting lies that were printed about the McCanns in the newspapers. She seems to think it all ended with a £500,00 payout - when in reality they spawned many of the [ censored word ]s who continue daily to abuse the McCanns in the same way the newspapers did.
She should try writing an article in support of the McCanns and will quickly find herself villified insulted and screeched at with a level of venom that will probably take her breath away.
The McCanns have no problem with newspapers, but they DO had a big problem with irresponsible reporting which can devastate the lives of innocent people.
Carole Malone also avoids mentioning the fact that the McCann name does sell newspapers. This is obvious from the re-cycled articles that frequently appear, which are not at the behest of the McCanns - it is also obvious from the fact that she herself is writing about them. Would she be doing that if there was no benefit to the Sunday Mirror sales figures and thereby indirectly to herself. Maybe she should check the meaning of the word 'Hypocrite'.
8@??)( 8@??)( 8@??)(
-
Do you have a link to the Carole Malone, article you posted Faith?
-
Do you have a link to the Carole Malone, article you posted Faith?
The piece was in the paper edition.