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: John on November 23, 2014, 12:58:10 AM
-
Madeleine McCann's mother teams up with posties to help in the hunt for missing children
Kate McCann will front the campaign, which will see 124,000 postmen and women get alerts on their scanners, used to track and sign for deliveries, when a child or adult disappears.
(http://i4.mirror.co.uk/incoming/article4640054.ece/alternates/s615/Maddie-Kate-McCann-Main.jpg)
Missing hunt: Kate McCann will help find missing children
Madeleine McCann’s mother Kate has teamed up with Britain’s posties to help in the hunt for missing children.
The Royal Mail’s 124,000 postmen and women will get alerts on their scanners, used to track and sign for deliveries, when a child or adult disappears.
The group will also use nearly 2,000 TV screens at mail centres to raise the alarm in the tie-up with charity Missing People, which is promoted by Kate.
A recorded message from the former GP will be shown for the first time on Tuesday to Royal Mail staff on their internal telly network.
In it, Kate, whose three-year-old daughter disappeared from a holiday apartment in Portugal in May 2007, tells them: “We hear of people who are willing to help, who see people every day, see changes in routine every day, and I think it is a really exciting prospect in the crucial role they can play.”
Kate, 46, an ambassador for the charity, helped launch an enhanced child rescue alert scheme in the spring.
She and heart doctor husband Gerry, 46, from Rothley, Leics, believe Madeleine – who would now be 11 – could still be alive.
www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccanns-mother-teams-up-4640167
-
Madeleine McCann's mother teams up with posties to help in the hunt for missing children
Kate McCann will front the campaign, which will see 124,000 postmen and women get alerts on their scanners, used to track and sign for deliveries, when a child or adult disappears.
(http://i4.mirror.co.uk/incoming/article4640054.ece/alternates/s615/Maddie-Kate-McCann-Main.jpg)
Missing hunt: Kate McCann will help find missing children
Madeleine McCann’s mother Kate has teamed up with Britain’s posties to help in the hunt for missing children.
The Royal Mail’s 124,000 postmen and women will get alerts on their scanners, used to track and sign for deliveries, when a child or adult disappears.
The group will also use nearly 2,000 TV screens at mail centres to raise the alarm in the tie-up with charity Missing People, which is promoted by Kate.
A recorded message from the former GP will be shown for the first time on Tuesday to Royal Mail staff on their internal telly network.
In it, Kate, whose three-year-old daughter disappeared from a holiday apartment in Portugal in May 2007, tells them: “We hear of people who are willing to help, who see people every day, see changes in routine every day, and I think it is a really exciting prospect in the crucial role they can play.”
Kate, 46, an ambassador for the charity, helped launch an enhanced child rescue alert scheme in the spring.
She and heart doctor husband Gerry, 46, from Rothley, Leics, believe Madeleine – who would now be 11 – could still be alive.
www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccanns-mother-teams-up-4640167
Does anyone else find this supremely ironic? Here we have a woman who when asked a bunch of very simple questions by detectives about the circumstances of her child's disappearance replied with silence.
-
Does anyone else find this supremely ironic? Here we have a woman who when asked a bunch of very simple questions by detectives about the circumstances of her child's disappearance replied with silence.
I find nothing ironic about it at all, but I do find it sadly predictable that Kate McCann is being bashed for her actions to help missing children yet again.
-
I find nothing ironic about it at all, but I do find it sadly predictable that Kate McCann is being bashed for her actions to help missing children yet again.
Had she exercised just a tad of that charitable spirit towards her daughter seven years ago she wouldn't be in this situation now.
-
he is right if the mcanns had not left the children maddie would be a normal 11 year old now
-
I despair. I really do.
-
I think it is very disappointing even if it is utterly predictable that there are people whose views have become so poisoned that they can see no good in a person who is working very hard on behalf of missing people, particularly children.
Next time a sentence is started ... "Why Madeleine McCann ... what about all the other missing children?" ...
it might be worth wondering what exactly the writer may have done in his or her miserable existence to further
help for anyone at all.
At least Madeleine's mother is doing something positive ... if there are people who have a problem with that ... it says a great deal more about them than they can possibly realise.
-
I think it is very disappointing even if it is utterly predictable that there are people whose views have become so poisoned that they can see no good in a person who is working very hard on behalf of missing people, particularly children.
Next time a sentence is started ... "Why Madeleine McCann ... what about all the other missing children?" ...
it might be worth wondering what exactly the writer may have done in his or her miserable existence to further
help for anyone at all.
At least Madeleine's mother is doing something positive ... if there are people who have a problem with that ... it says a great deal more about them than they can possibly realise.
and whose fault is it her daughter went missing ?
Ah yes gm and km.
-
what a wonderful thing for Kate to get involved in...just can't help but admire her.
-
what a wonderful thing for Kate to get involved in...just can't help but admire her.
As a neglecting parent of three children, one of whom disappeared whilst she was out drinking.
Nice.
-
what a wonderful thing for Kate to get involved in...just can't help but admire her.
It's a very smart idea. Postmen and Postwomen notice things. Thousands of eyes on the streets daily.
-
Oh do piss off.
Oh dear Alf my son your suave, sophisticated, charming, urbane facade is slipping.
I can supply a few acrow props to jack it back up if you like. For you my boy at only twice the going rate.
-
I've printed out and distributed posters of various missing children (as many others have done).
There are two approaches, though, and I was never sure which was best.
- Plaster photos / details wherever possible, in the event that someone passing by might see it and recognise the child, or
- Hand them to staff in pharmacies, check-out staff in supermarkets / petrol stations, etc., to keep under the counter (in case a perp walks in with the child and doesn't expect anyone to recognise him/her).
-
As long as there remains some doubt over the actual circumstances of Madeleine's disappearance my own view is that it is inappropriate to involve the McCanns in these projects. That said however, I can see why they are being used since 'used' is the operative word.
-
As long as there remains some doubt over the actual circumstances of Madeleine's disappearance my own view is that it is inappropriate to involve the McCanns in these projects. That said however, I can see why they are being used since 'used' is the operative word.
My thoughts exactly.
-
As long as there remains some doubt over the actual circumstances of Madeleine's disappearance my own view is that it is inappropriate to involve the McCanns in these projects. That said however, I can see why they are being used since 'used' is the operative word.
well said
-
As long as there remains some doubt over the actual circumstances of Madeleine's disappearance my own view is that it is inappropriate to involve the McCanns in these projects. That said however, I can see why they are being used since 'used' is the operative word.
Do you think it appropriate that Gerry is employed as a cardiologist, when there is still "some doubt" as to the circumstances of Madeleine's disappearance? Is it appropriate that the twins are allowed to live with their parents when there is still "some doubt" about what happened to their sister? Are the McCanns still suspects in their daughter's disappearance in your view?
-
Do you think it appropriate that Gerry is employed as a cardiologist, when there is still "some doubt" as to the circumstances of Madeleine's disappearance? Is it appropriate that the twins are allowed to live with their parents when there is still "some doubt" about what happened to their sister? Are the McCanns still suspects in their daughter's disappearance in your view?
A complete non sequitur...
-
Do you think it appropriate that Gerry is employed as a cardiologist, when there is still "some doubt" as to the circumstances of Madeleine's disappearance? Is it appropriate that the twins are allowed to live with their parents when there is still "some doubt" about what happened to their sister? Are the McCanns still suspects in their daughter's disappearance in your view?
I fear you have missed the point Alfred.
I am not saying they are suspects although thousands of people in the UK and many more in Portugal apparently have a different opinion on that question. What I am saying or at least attempting to portray is that until such time as Madeleine's fate is known I am uncomfortable with them being used in any Ambassadorial role.
Organisers of these initiatives should not be using anyone who is part of an ongoing police investigation.
-
I fear you have missed the point Alfred.
I am not saying they are suspects although thousands of people in the UK and many more in Portugal apparently have a different opinion on that question. What I am saying or at least attempting to portray is that until such time as Madeleine's fate is known I am uncomfortable with them being used in any Ambassadorial role.
Organisers of these initiatives should not be using anyone who is part of an ongoing police investigation.
A fair enough point with which it is difficult to argue in a logical manner.
-
I fear you have missed the point Alfred.
I am not saying they are suspects although thousands of people in the UK and many more in Portugal apparently have a different opinion on that question. What I am saying or at least attempting to portray is that until such time as Madeleine's fate is known I am uncomfortable with them being used in any Ambassadorial role.
Organisers of these initiatives should not be using anyone who is part of an ongoing police investigation.
Heaven forfend that Missing People makes decisions that makes you uncomfortable John! Kate McCann is the most famous mother of a missing child in the world, she is therefore the ideal candidate for the role of Ambassador. Why would this make you uncomfortable unless you believed that she were still under suspicion? Why do you think a charity such as Missing People would put so much faith in Kate McCann if they felt she was unsuitable for the role and likely to tarnish their organisation? Any parent of any child that is missing is likely to be part of an ongoing police investigation, unless you're somehow suggesting that Kate is part of the police investigation as a suspect....?
You've spent too long in the company of "sceptics", I fear...
-
A complete non sequitur...
Not really. John is arguing that whilst there is the taint of suspicion attached to the McCanns (in certain quarters) that this casts their suitability for certain roles into question. Well, if Kate is not an appropriate ambassador for Missing Children (and who would be more suitable in your view?) then what about the even more serious and risky business of being a cardiologist / parent? After all these are people you believe neglected their kids so badly that one of them died and they had to dump her body in a bin! And yet Kate being Ambassador for Missing Children seems to upset some of you more than the fact that Gerry deals with the members of the public as a health care professional, and both still have their young kids living with them. Where is your daily outrage about these particular roles that they fulfil? Perhaps you have missed a bit of a trick there, eh?
-
Heaven forfend that Missing People makes decisions that makes you uncomfortable John! Kate McCann is the most famous mother of a missing child in the world, she is therefore the ideal candidate for the role of Ambassador. Why would this make you uncomfortable unless you believed that she were still under suspicion? Why do you think a charity such as Missing People would put so much faith in Kate McCann if they felt she was unsuitable for the role and likely to tarnish their organisation? Any parent of any child that is missing is likely to be part of an ongoing police investigation, unless you're somehow suggesting that Kate is part of the police investigation as a suspect....?
You've spent too long in the company of "sceptics", I fear...
Until the case is eventually determined there will be many individuals who are still under suspicion. That said, engendering suspicion is not the same as being designated a suspect.
I don't know which world you refer to Alfred but I fear your claim is somewhat exaggerated. As for the charity, they took a risk by ratifying the appointment and would have been better choosing someone who was not burdened by their own failings.
Is it appropriate that parents who have previously been designated official suspects in their own child's disappearance and who have thereafter been the subject of a Social Services intervention into their parenting skills should hold such a position?
-
The very fact that kate has been chosen for these roles shows that in the real world the McCcanns are seen as innocent victims of a crime...that's what really upsets some on these forums whose own opinions are based on sheer ignorance..imo
-
what are you on about...I don't care what you think of me..totally unimportant...
the fact is that by being given this role it shows how much respect Kate has in the real world
Respect in the real world ?
Really ?
By a few uniformed people and those that back back her maybe.
However, for anyone with an iota of intelligence, her appointments are APPALLING.
-
Until the case is eventually determined there will be many individuals who are still under suspicion. That said, engendering suspicion is not the same as being designated a suspect.
I don't know which world you refer to Alfred but I fear your claim is somewhat exaggerated. As for the charity, they took a risk by ratifying the appointment and would have been better choosing someone who was not burdened by their own failings.
Is it appropriate that parents who have previously been designated official suspects in their own child's disappearance and who have thereafter been the subject of a Social Services intervention into their parenting skills should hold such a position?
You fear my claim that Kate is the most famous mother of a missing child in the world is somewhat exaggerated?? OK, then - name a more famous one.
It is wholly appropriate to appoint someone to the role of Ambassador for missing children who knows as much as Kate does about the subject and who has first hand experience of having a missing child and all it entails. She is not a suspect and is not a criminal and just because lots of small-minded, spiteful and vindictive people hate her guts doesn't mean she isn't right for the role.
-
The fact that kate is involved in these schemes prove that in the real world the McCanns are under no suspicion whatsoever
-
The very fact that kate has been chosen for these roles shows that in the real world the McCcanns are seen as innocent victims of a crime...that's what really upsets some on these forums whose own opinions are based on sheer ignorance imo.
IIRC April Jones' mum is also promoting the Missing People charity - alongside Kate. Why no criticism of her involvement - even though exactly the same can be said about Coral Jones as Kate McCann because if it wasn't for her decision to let 5 yr old April play out unsupervised that evening - what happened to their little girl would not have happened.
Quote from Coral Jones
As April’s mother I will live with the guilt of letting her go out to play on the estate that night for the rest of my life."."
End quote
I don't see anyone hounding April's parents on a daily basis for unwittingly making a decision which resulted in the disappearance of their daughter.
The McCanns have acknowledged that they also unwittingly made a decision which resulted in the disappearance of their child, and have also said they will carry the guilt for that for the rest of their lives. And yet for 7 years they have been held totally responsible for Madeleine's disappearance by some - purely because it was their decision to leave her unsupervised.
Bizarre logic IMO.
The only difference between these two mothers IMO is that in one case the real criminal has been found and in the other case - has yet to be.
IMO both Kate and Coral are perfect for the job of promoting Missing People. I admire them both.
-
IIRC April Jones' mum is also promoting the Missing People charity - alongside Kate. Why no criticism of her involvement - even though exactly the same can be said about Coral Jones as Kate McCann because if it wasn't for her decision to let 5 yr old April play out unsupervised that evening - what happened to their little girl would not have happened.
Quote from Coral Jones
As April’s mother I will live with the guilt of letting her go out to play on the estate that night for the rest of my life."."
End quote
I don't see anyone hounding April's parents on a daily basis for unwittingly making a decision which resulted in the disappearance of their daughter.
The McCanns have acknowledged that they also unwittingly made a decision which resulted in the disappearance of their child, and have also said they will carry the guilt for that for the rest of their lives. And yet for 7 years they have been held totally responsible for Madeleine's disappearance by some - purely because it was their decision to leave her unsupervised.
Bizarre logic IMO.
The only difference between these two mothers IMO is that in one case the real criminal has been found and in the other case - has yet to be.
IMO both Kate and Coral are perfect for the job of promoting Missing People. I admire them both.
Excuses, excuses.
Was April Jones mother out boozing ?
-
Had she exercised just a tad of that charitable spirit towards her daughter seven years ago she wouldn't be in this situation now.
Indeed not.
She and Gerry would now be languishing in a Portuguese jail serving time for the crimes of others against their daughter and ALL hope of finding Madeleine would be gone because she would be universally regarded as "dead".
Thank goodness Kate and Gerry had sufficient resolve and resilience to withstand the emotional assault and persuade the Prosecutors and the PJ of their (undoubted) innocence.
The tragedy for Madeleine is that the time and effort invested in the process (of establishing the McCanns' innocence) was time wasted in tracking down the true perpetrators of crimes against Madeleine
-
IIRC April Jones' mum is also promoting the Missing People charity - alongside Kate. Why no criticism of her involvement - even though exactly the same can be said about Coral Jones as Kate McCann because if it wasn't for her decision to let 5 yr old April play out unsupervised that evening - what happened to their little girl would not have happened.
Quote from Coral Jones
As April’s mother I will live with the guilt of letting her go out to play on the estate that night for the rest of my life."."
End quote
I don't see anyone hounding April's parents on a daily basis for unwittingly making a decision which resulted in the disappearance of their daughter.
The McCanns have acknowledged that they also unwittingly made a decision which resulted in the disappearance of their child, and have also said they will carry the guilt for that for the rest of their lives. And yet for 7 years they have been held totally responsible for Madeleine's disappearance by some - purely because it was their decision to leave her unsupervised.
Bizarre logic IMO.
The only difference between these two mothers IMO is that in one case the real criminal has been found and in the other case - has yet to be.
IMO both Kate and Coral are perfect for the job of promoting Missing People. I admire them both.
Maybe something to do with the difference between.
As April’s mother I will live with the guilt of letting her go out to play on the estate that night for the rest of my life."."
But she admits it was a decision that torments her with every waking moment. "We've doubted what we did," Kate says. "It's hard to answer the question, 'Were we wrong to leave them?' If I'd had to think for one second, 'Should we have dinner and leave them?' I wouldn't have done it.
"It didn't happen like that. I didn't have to think for a second, that's how safe I felt. It's not like we went down town or anything. That night runs over and over in my mind and I'm sure people will learn from our mistake, if you want to call it that. I love her and I'm a totally responsible parent and that's the only thing that keeps me going."
Her eyes falling to Cuddle Cat, which she has reluctantly washed after it became filthy from her carrying it around, Kate adds: "I feel desperately sorry to her that we weren't there."
-
A complete non sequitur...
On the contrary.
(Alfred's) is a very pertinent point ...
-
On the contrary.
(Alfred's) is a very pertinent point ...
So you are equating allowing someone connected with an investigation a) taking up a voluntary role in an organisation campaigning against the subject of that investigation and b) continuing their chosen profession?
-
Excuses, excuses.
Was April Jones mother out boozing ?
I don't know what she was doing whilst she let her little girl play out unsupervised. Do you? Maybe she was having a meal. However, just as with the McCanns - it was because of her decision to let her daughter play out without her parents' supervision which resulted in tragedy.
Apparently they had let their little girl play out unsupervised 'hundreds of times before.' Surely that makes them guilty of serious neglect in your eyes and they should be prosecuted? If not why not?
Please explain the difference between two mothers both unwittingly making a decision which (because they were unsupervised) resulted in both their daughters disappearance Why is one to be sympathised with - and the other one demonised?
-
So you are equating allowing someone connected with an investigation a) taking up a voluntary role in an organisation campaigning against the subject of that investigation and b) continuing their chosen profession?
The McCanns are not being investigated.
Attempts are being made to track down the perpetrators of crime(s) against Madeleine; also to find Madeleine.
The McCanns are victims.
Madeleine is a victim.
-
I don't know what she was doing whilst she let her little girl play out unsupervised. Do you? Maybe she was having a meal. However, just as with the McCanns - it was because of her decision to let her daughter play out without her parents' supervision which resulted in tragedy.
Apparently they had let their little girl play out unsupervised 'hundreds of times before.' Surely that makes them guilty of serious neglect in your eyes and they should be prosecuted? If not why not?
Please explain the difference between two mothers both unwittingly making a decision which (because they were unsupervised) resulted in both their daughters disappearance Why is one to be sympathised with - and the other one demonised?
Now what did the mccanns say.................
about 'responsible parenting skills' ?
Has April ones mother and father made money from their daughter's death ?
-
The McCanns are not being investigated.
Attempts are being made to track down the perpetrators of crime(s) against Madeleine; also to find Madeleine.
The McCanns are victims.
Madeleine is a victim.
WRONG.
Madeleine is the victim.
The mccanns through their arrogant stupidity made her that.
-
Now what did the mccanns say.................
about 'responsible parenting skills' ?
Has April ones mother and father made money from their daughter's death ?
Do you blame Coral Jones' parenting skills for the disappearance of her daughter in the same way as you have been blaming the McCanns on a daily basis? After all - it was her decision to let 5yr old April play out unsupervised -apparently something she had done hundreds of times before - just as it was the McCanns decision to leave Madeleine asleep unsupervised - in the same way as other parents have done thousands of times before. But on one dreadful occasion - the result of those decisions by both parents in both cases was tragedy - their daughters disappeared.
Instead of trying to change the subject - why don't you explain why you villify one set of parents and not the other?
-
IIRC April Jones' mum is also promoting the Missing People charity - alongside Kate. Why no criticism of her involvement - even though exactly the same can be said about Coral Jones as Kate McCann because if it wasn't for her decision to let 5 yr old April play out unsupervised that evening - what happened to their little girl would not have happened.
Quote from Coral Jones
As April’s mother I will live with the guilt of letting her go out to play on the estate that night for the rest of my life."."
End quote
I don't see anyone hounding April's parents on a daily basis for unwittingly making a decision which resulted in the disappearance of their daughter.
The McCanns have acknowledged that they also unwittingly made a decision which resulted in the disappearance of their child, and have also said they will carry the guilt for that for the rest of their lives. And yet for 7 years they have been held totally responsible for Madeleine's disappearance by some - purely because it was their decision to leave her unsupervised.
Bizarre logic IMO.
The only difference between these two mothers IMO is that in one case the real criminal has been found and in the other case - has yet to be.
IMO both Kate and Coral are perfect for the job of promoting Missing People. I admire them both.
Puzzling isn`t it?
.........especially since there is so little to choose between allowing a 5 year old out to play with her friends and leaving a 3 year old, previously known to wake distressed, in an unlocked apartment at night with her younger siblings.
-
I despair. I really do.
Awful for Kate, isn`t it?
.......especially after she had shown such compassion and empathy with a 3 year old who`d previously woken distressed at night;....... even discussing leaving the door unlocked to enable her to get out and find her parents should the same thing happen again.
Enough to make Alfred and yourself cuss at posters or despair.
-
Awful for Kate, isn`t it?
.......especially after she had shown such compassion and empathy with a 3 year old who`d previously woken distressed at night;....... even discussing leaving the door unlocked to enable her to get out and find her parents should the same thing happen again.
Enough to make Alfred and yourself cuss at posters or despair.
Unfortunately the McCann acolytes can't see the wood because of the trees.
No change on that one then.
-
what a wonderful thing for Kate to get involved in...just can't help but admire her.
Why admire? Has it escaped your notice that for anyone in the uk who are in any way interested in this fiasco and share your view that there are even more who can't stand the woman and what she represents? I too despair !!! I despair that a national charity can be so insensitive towards those other parents of missing children among whom are Ben and Daniel.
-
Puzzling isn`t it?
.........especially since there is so little to choose between allowing a 5 year old out to play with her friends and leaving a 3 year old, previously known to wake distressed, in an unlocked apartment at night with her younger siblings.
I feel a George Mparrbe moment coming on:
"What you has to understand is dat in de context of de McCann case de normal rules does not apply ........................"
-
I feel a George Mparrbe moment coming on:
"What you has to understand is dat in de context of de McCann case de normal rules does not apply ........................"
What I would like to know is why ??? Why are missing children Ben and Daniel treated differently ?
-
Do you blame Coral Jones' parenting skills for the disappearance of her daughter in the same way as you have been blaming the McCanns on a daily basis? After all - it was her decision to let 5yr old April play out unsupervised -apparently something she had done hundreds of times before - just as it was the McCanns decision to leave Madeleine asleep unsupervised - in the same way as other parents have done thousands of times before. But on one dreadful occasion - the result of those decisions by both parents in both cases was tragedy - their daughters disappeared.
Instead of trying to change the subject - why don't you explain why you vilify one set of parents and not the other?
Why go to the bother of vilifying anyone at all?
After all it is a burden the parents of a missing child have to endure and if it is because they made the wrong call (hands up every perfect parent who has never made a poor decision)their trauma must be all the more severe.
So why go to the bother of choosing to add to unimaginable distress? The parents are the people doing the suffering every day of their lives, it means nothing to the people hounding them.
I think it is worth remembering that if an unknown person hadn't removed Madeleine McCann from the apartment in Praia Da Luz ... we would never have heard of her or her parents ... that would really have given some people a dilemma, they would have had to find someone else to hate, 'investigate' and make up scenarios against over the past seven years.
Unless someone belonging to you disappears there can be empathy but little conception of the suffering of the family.
No-one knows better than the parents of missing children what that must be like and how important it is that people feel that everything possible is being done to find their loved one. Using posties is a great idea, but raising awareness in everyone to be watchful is a good idea.
Unfortunately for them, Coral and Madeleine's parents could not be better qualified to front such a worthwhile endeavour.
-
What I would like to know is why ??? Why are missing children Ben and Daniel treated differently ?
It was only a matter of time;
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=5679.msg201938#msg201938
-
I think Kate's role in this scheme just confirms what absolute b#####ks her critics on here believe
-
I think Kate's role in this scheme just confirms what absolute b#####ks her critics on here believe
How so? What exactly makes Kate's role in this scheme the case that she is now above suspicion ?
[edited]
-
Posters are reminded to address the topic under discussion. Inappropriate comments will be removed as per forum policy. TY
-
I think Kate's role in this scheme just confirms what absolute b#####ks her critics on here believe
km's role is the supreme height of hypocrisy.
She and her husband are responsible for Madeleine's fate, until a court proves otherwise.
-
I don't think a couple of glasses of wine with dinner is neither here nor there. You can in this country have 1 maybe 2 glasses of wine and drive a car.
Honestly I do think people should let it go when it comes to the McCanns childcare arrangements that week. If you look at the listening service that comparable resorts have used in the past it's a similar system to what the McCanns adopted, so the McCanns aren't the only ones doing this. IMO, it wouldn't be what many of us would do, but then we are not all the same. If their child truly has been abducted I would not in any way judge the McCanns harshly. It's a brutal price to pay for poor judgement imo on their part. They are surely now paying a bigger price then any court could impose on them and poor Madeline paid the biggest price of all. That should be enough for any McCann h8ter.
-
How so? What exactly makes Kate's role in this scheme the case that she is now above suspicion ?
[edited]
At least one poster on here labours under the delusion that she has been charged with a freudian slip crime.
-
The McCanns are not being investigated.
Attempts are being made to track down the perpetrators of crime(s) against Madeleine; also to find Madeleine.
The McCanns are victims.
Madeleine is a victim.
Type of crime unknown.
-
So you are equating allowing someone connected with an investigation a) taking up a voluntary role in an organisation campaigning against the subject of that investigation and b) continuing their chosen profession?
What's the difference? Why are you so concerned by a) but completely (seemingly) unconcerned by b)? What are the risks and potential negative outcomes attached to taking up the role a) Missing People Ambassador that aren't present in the ongoing role of b) healthcare professional or c) parent?
-
Type of crime unknown.
It seems evident to us and because the files contain enough elements for such, that the crime of exposure or abandonment according to article 138 of the Penal Code can be eliminated from that range:
"1 - Whoever places another person's life in danger,
a) By exposing her in a location where she is subject to a situation from which she, on her own, cannot defend herself against; or
b) Abandoning her without defence, whenever the agent had the duty to guard her, to watch over her or to assist her;"
This legal type of crime is only fulfilled with intent, and this intent has to cover the creation of danger to the victim's life, as well as the absence of a capacity to defend herself, on the victim's behalf. In the case of the files and facing the elements that were collected it is evident that none of the arguidos Gerald or Kate acted with intent. The parents could not foresee that in the resort that they chose to spend a brief holiday, they could place the life of any of their children in danger, nor was that demanded from them: it was located in a peaceful area, where most of the residents are foreign citizens of the same nationality and without any known history of this type of criminality.
The parents didn't even represent the realisation of the fact, they trusted that everything would go well, as it had gone on the previous evenings, thus not equating, nor was it demanded from them, the possibility of the occurrence of an abduction of any of the children that were in their respective apartments.
Reinforcing what was said is also the fact that despite leaving their daughter alone with her siblings in the apartment during more or less dilated moments, it is certain that in any case they checked on them. Without any pretension or compensatory effect, we must also recognise that the parents already expiate a heavy penalty - the disappearance of Madeleine - due to their lack of caution in the surveillance and protection of their children.
Concerning the other indicated crimes, they are no more than that and despite our perception that, due to its high degree of probability, the occurrence of a homicide cannot be discarded, such cannot be more than a mere supposition, due to the lack of sustaining elements in the files.
The non involvement of the arguidos parents of Madeleine in any penally relevant action seems to result from the objective circumstances of them not being inside the apartment when she disappeared, from the normal behaviour that they adopted until said disappearance and afterwards, as can be amply concluded from the witness statements, from the telephone communications analysis and also from the forensics' conclusions, namely the Reports from the FSS and from the National Institute for Legal Medicine.
To this can be added that, in reality, none of the indications that led to their constitution as arguidos was later confirmed or consolidated. If not, let us see: the information concerning a previous alert of the media before the polices was not confirmed, the traces that were marked by the dogs were not ratified in laboratory, and the initial indications from the above transcribed email, better clarified at a later date, ended up being revealed as innocuous.
Even if, hypothetically, one could admit that Gerald and Kate McCann might be responsible over the child's death, it would still have to be explained how, where through, when, with what means, with the help of whom and where to they freed themselves of her body within the restricted time frame that would have been available to them to do so. Their daily routine, until the 3rd of May, had been circumscribed to the narrow borders of the 'Ocean Club' resort and to the beach that lies next to it, unknowing the surrounding terrain and, apart from the English friends that were with them on holiday there, they had no known friends or contacts in Portugal.
(Portuguese prosecutors)
The parents didn't even represent the realisation of the fact, they trusted that everything would go well, as it had gone on the previous evenings, thus not equating, nor was it demanded from them, the possibility of the occurrence of an abduction of any of the children that were in their respective apartments.
Looks as if the prosecutors are pretty convinced about the crime of abduction.
If only they had the perspicacity and depth of understanding of venerable denizens of this board and elsewhere ...
-
It seems evident to us and because the files contain enough elements for such, that the crime of exposure or abandonment according to article 138 of the Penal Code can be eliminated from that range:
"1 - Whoever places another person's life in danger,
a) By exposing her in a location where she is subject to a situation from which she, on her own, cannot defend herself against; or
b) Abandoning her without defence, whenever the agent had the duty to guard her, to watch over her or to assist her;"
This legal type of crime is only fulfilled with intent, and this intent has to cover the creation of danger to the victim's life, as well as the absence of a capacity to defend herself, on the victim's behalf. In the case of the files and facing the elements that were collected it is evident that none of the arguidos Gerald or Kate acted with intent. The parents could not foresee that in the resort that they chose to spend a brief holiday, they could place the life of any of their children in danger, nor was that demanded from them: it was located in a peaceful area, where most of the residents are foreign citizens of the same nationality and without any known history of this type of criminality.
The parents didn't even represent the realisation of the fact, they trusted that everything would go well, as it had gone on the previous evenings, thus not equating, nor was it demanded from them, the possibility of the occurrence of an abduction of any of the children that were in their respective apartments.
Reinforcing what was said is also the fact that despite leaving their daughter alone with her siblings in the apartment during more or less dilated moments, it is certain that in any case they checked on them. Without any pretension or compensatory effect, we must also recognise that the parents already expiate a heavy penalty - the disappearance of Madeleine - due to their lack of caution in the surveillance and protection of their children.
Concerning the other indicated crimes, they are no more than that and despite our perception that, due to its high degree of probability, the occurrence of a homicide cannot be discarded, such cannot be more than a mere supposition, due to the lack of sustaining elements in the files.
The non involvement of the arguidos parents of Madeleine in any penally relevant action seems to result from the objective circumstances of them not being inside the apartment when she disappeared, from the normal behaviour that they adopted until said disappearance and afterwards, as can be amply concluded from the witness statements, from the telephone communications analysis and also from the forensics' conclusions, namely the Reports from the FSS and from the National Institute for Legal Medicine.
To this can be added that, in reality, none of the indications that led to their constitution as arguidos was later confirmed or consolidated. If not, let us see: the information concerning a previous alert of the media before the polices was not confirmed, the traces that were marked by the dogs were not ratified in laboratory, and the initial indications from the above transcribed email, better clarified at a later date, ended up being revealed as innocuous.
Even if, hypothetically, one could admit that Gerald and Kate McCann might be responsible over the child's death, it would still have to be explained how, where through, when, with what means, with the help of whom and where to they freed themselves of her body within the restricted time frame that would have been available to them to do so. Their daily routine, until the 3rd of May, had been circumscribed to the narrow borders of the 'Ocean Club' resort and to the beach that lies next to it, unknowing the surrounding terrain and, apart from the English friends that were with them on holiday there, they had no known friends or contacts in Portugal.
(Portuguese prosecutors)
The parents didn't even represent the realisation of the fact, they trusted that everything would go well, as it had gone on the previous evenings, thus not equating, nor was it demanded from them, the possibility of the occurrence of an abduction of any of the children that were in their respective apartments.
Looks as if the prosecutors are pretty convinced about the crime of abduction.
If only they had the perspicacity and depth of understanding of venerable denizens of this board and elsewhere ...
and what has been found ?
-
Do we know what precisely are the duties of "Ambassador" for Missing People? It isn't obvious from the website
Brenda Blethyn, Fiona Phillips and Alastair Stewart are with KM among the nine ambassadors. Among the patrons are John Stapleton and Lorraine Kelly; sort of a GMTV benefit. But joking apart presumably they are just "names" to draw cash for charitable use?
-
Do we know what precisely are the duties of "Ambassador" for Missing People? It isn't obvious from the website
Brenda Blethyn, Fiona Phillips and Alastair Stewart are with KM among the nine ambassadors. Among the patrons are John Stapleton and Lorraine Kelly; sort of a GMTV benefit. But joking apart presumably they are just "names" to draw cash for charitable use?
The most important thing is the reinforcement of the acceptance by the public that the mccanns are innocent
-
The most important thing is the reinforcement of the acceptance by the public that the mccanns are innocent
Innocent ?
They have yet to be charged with a crime.
.......and I wonder just how many people when presented with the facts, believe the mccanns story.
Which of course has yet to be proved to be true.
-
Innocent ?
They have yet to be charged with a crime.
.......and I wonder just how many people when presented with the facts, believe the mccanns story.
Which of course has yet to be proved to be true.
Yes perceived as innocent by the public
-
Yes perceived as innocent by the public
Really ?
Which members of the public is that ?
-
Really ?
Which members of the public is that ?
remember what I said about not being able to have an intelligent conversation with you
-
remember what I said about not being able to have an intelligent conversation with you
That would presume you had any in the first place.
Now let me know how many people actually believe the mccanns story, other than of course devotees like yourself.
-
That would presume you had any in the first place.
Now let me know how many people actually believe the mccanns story, other than of course devotees like yourself.
if you have read the title of the thread you will understand what my post refers to...this organisation believes in the innocence of the mccanns and by supporting them promotes their innocence to the general public...
-
if you have read the title of the thread you will understand what my post refers to...this organisation believes in the innocence of the mccanns and by supporting them promotes their innocence to the general public...
There's an organisation ??? - I'd never have guessed .
-
if you have read the title of the thread you will understand what my post refers to...this organisation believes in the innocence of the mccanns and by supporting them promotes their innocence to the general public...
I am well aware of that.
However, the hypocrisy of appointing her to any post after what she and her husband failed to do in keeping their children safe is quite frankly staggering.
-
I am well aware of that.
However, the hypocrisy of appointing her to any post after what she and her husband failed to do in keeping their children safe is quite frankly staggering.
in your opinion
-
in your opinion
Really.
What the mccanns failed to do is documented fact.
That is why Madeleine disappeared.
-
The most important thing is the reinforcement of the acceptance by the public that the mccanns are innocent
The question was "What is the role of an Ambassador for missing people"
The answer I would submit is not the blether you came up with above.
I suspect you are completely incapable of ever making a post relevant to the one to which you respond.
If you must stalk do it with a degree intelligence please.
-
The question was "What is the role of an Ambassador for missing people"
The answer I would submit is not the blether you came up with above.
I suspect you are completely incapable of ever making a post relevant to the one to which you respond.
If you must stalk do it with a degree intelligence please.
Maybe one of the roles of an ambassador for a charity is to raise the profile and awareness of the functions of that charity.
The fact that "Missing People" is being discussed here suggests that is one function which has been successfully accomplished.
-
km's role is the supreme height of hypocrisy.
She and her husband are responsible for Madeleine's fate, until a court proves otherwise.
Personally I think charities have definitely lost touch with public feeling and nowhere is this more obvious than with the bestowing of a Global Legacy award by Save the Children on Tony Blair.
-
Personally I think charities have definitely lost touch with public feeling and nowhere is this more obvious than with the bestowing of a Global Legacy award by Save the Children on Tony Blair.
Indeed with that name in tow, it really says everything, unfortunately.
-
Maybe one of the roles of an ambassador for a charity is to raise the profile and awareness of the functions of that charity.
The fact that "Missing People" is being discussed here suggests that is one function which has been successfully accomplished.
I would have preferred you to respond to my original post on the topic an the not the one after davel saw fit to attempt to get it off track.
-
The question was "What is the role of an Ambassador for missing people"
The answer I would submit is not the blether you came up with above.
I suspect you are completely incapable of ever making a post relevant to the one to which you respond.
If you must stalk do it with a degree intelligence please.
I don't think the role is important...that's why I chose to ignore it...what is important afaiac is the appointment reinforces the public perception of the mccanns innocence
-
I don't think the role is important...that's why I chose to ignore it...what is important afaiac is the appointment reinforces the public perception of the mccanns innocence
I believe that by the time Kate was made an ambassador she and her husband had given Missing People a hefty donation via their celebrity rooftop gathering. Perhaps it was a quid pro quo arrangement ?
-
I believe that by the time Kate was made an ambassador she and her husband had given Missing People a hefty donation via their celebrity rooftop gathering. Perhaps it was a quid pro quo arrangement ?
And maybe Missing People realised that it was to their advantage to have well known parents like Coral Jones and Kate McCann linked to their charity. Every charity relies heavily on public awareness of their existence - but even more so when the charity is about missing people who they are trying to find - and so the public's help to do that is crucial.
It worked for me as I had never heard of them before Kate became involved with them. I'm sure I'm not alone in that.
-
And maybe Missing People realised that it was to their advantage to have well known parents like Coral Jones and Kate McCann linked to their charity. Every charity relies heavily on public awareness of their existence - but even more so when the charity is about missing people who they are trying to find - and so the public's help to do that is crucial.
It worked for me as I had never heard of them before Kate became involved with them. I'm sure I'm not alone in that.
Is Coral Jones an ambassador then ?
-
And maybe Missing People realised that it was to their advantage to have well known parents like Coral Jones and Kate McCann linked to their charity. Every charity relies heavily on public awareness of their existence - but even more so when the charity is about missing people who they are trying to find - and so the public's help to do that is crucial.
It worked for me as I had never heard of them before Kate became involved with them. I'm sure I'm not alone in that.
Absolutely. I've donated generously to Missing People as a direct result of Kate's involvement and I know others who have also done so. Anything or anyone who can raise a charity's profile is a good thing.
-
Is Coral Jones an ambassador then ?
I didn't say she was Faith, but she did join with Kate to launch the following scheme;
From WALESonline.
quote
The mother of murdered schoolgirl April Jones has joined Kate McCann to launch a new campaign aimed at signing up at least a million people to a missing children’s alert scheme.
Coral Jones and Mrs McCann, mother of missing Madeleine, unveiled a digital billboard at King’s Cross station in London promoting an enhanced Child Rescue Alerts system to inform the public about missing children whose lives are considered at risk.
The scheme will use social media including text messages, email and digital billboards across the UK in addition to traditional broadcast media to issue the alerts when it is launched on Sunday, International Missing Children’s Day.
The scheme, the responsibility of the National Crime Agency (NCA) in partnership with the charity Missing People and the company Groupcall Limited, already has 25,000 people signed up.
End quote
-
I don't think the role is important...that's why I chose to ignore it...what is important afaiac is the appointment reinforces the public perception of the mccanns innocence
You can believe that if you wish.
Unfortunately, it doesn't make it true.
-
I don't think the role is important...that's why I chose to ignore it...what is important afaiac is the appointment reinforces the public perception of the mccanns innocence
Orange bit:
So Brenda Blethyn, Alastair Stewart, Fiona Phillips and Julie Etchingham are in unimportant roles being Ambassadors for the charity?
Red bit:
You believe obviously that a charity with a turnover of less £2.8 MM is a reliable bellwether for public opinion?
-
Orange bit:
So Brenda Blethyn, Alastair Stewart, Fiona Phillips and Julie Etchingham are in unimportant roles being Ambassadors for the charity?
Red bit:
You believe obviously that a charity with a turnover of less £2.8 MM is a reliable bellwether for public opinion?
like Stephen you seem to have difficulty understanding my point......who mentioned public opinion?...the very fact that the post is reported in the press reinforces the perception of innocence of the mccanns...
-
like Stephen you seem to have difficulty understanding my point......who mentioned public opinion?...the very fact that the post is reported in the press reinforces the perception of innocence of the mccanns...
Perhaps the perception of innocence but what is that worth really ?
-
Perhaps the perception of innocence but what is that worth really ?
a lot...It's far better than the perception of guilt...which we had with the initial headlines
-
a lot...It's far better than the perception of guilt...which we had with the initial headlines
Really ? In what way ?
-
like Stephen you seem to have difficulty understanding my point......who mentioned public opinion?...the very fact that the post is reported in the press reinforces the perception of innocence of the mccanns...
I find difficulty understanding you a lot of the time which probably is a bigger reflection on you than me.
You have failed to address the question yet again by merely chanting a variation of your customary mantra, in response.
Are you here merely to be a wum or is there some constructive purpose to your presence on this forum?
-
lets make it really simple for people to understand
papers say maddies dna found in hire car..thats bad.
dogs detect scent of death...that's bad
SY say mccanns not suspects...that's good
kate made ambassador for missing children charity...that's good
-
lets make it really simple for people to understand
papers say maddies dna found in hire car..thats bad.
dogs detect scent of death...that's bad
SY say mccanns not suspects...that's good
kate made ambassador for missing children charity...that's good
The McCanns give countless thousands to Missing People....that's good
Kate is made an ambassador......money now becomes a sweetener.
-
There is such obvious desperation from some to try and pretend that this appointment is not a plus for the public perception of the mccanns...quite pathetic
-
There is also the patronising assumption that people running (no pun intended) voluntary organisations are not media savvy and are unable to work out that association with dubious characters won't do their cause much good but that working with popular people of good character will.
Dr Kate McCann was well known to this charity long before she attained a prominent position within it. I suggest her fund raising was initially cathartic as many people become associated with a particular charity because of personal experience.
I think the truly reprehensible aspects are the organised campaigns to bring down the charity's web site and impede its work when she ran to raise funds for them and when she was appointed to a position with them.
-
There is also the patronising assumption that people running (no pun intended) voluntary organisations are not media savvy and are unable to work out that association with dubious characters won't do their cause much good but that working with popular people of good character will.
Dr Kate McCann was well known to this charity long before she attained a prominent position within it. I suggest her fund raising was initially cathartic as many people become associated with a particular charity because of personal experience.
I think the truly reprehensible aspects are the organised campaigns to bring down the charity's web site and impede its work when she ran to raise funds for them and when she was appointed to a position with them.
I absolutely agree that any effort to damage the work the charity does is reprehensible. It's not the family of truly missing people's fault that the charity's management put the column inches that Kate McCann's involvement brings above their credibility.
-
You'd think if the families of missing people objected to Kate McCann representing themselves and the charity they'd have brought a considerable amount of pressure on the charity to kick her out wouldn't you? In fact, if Kate's appointment to ambassador for Missing People was so toxic that it was having a knock on effect on fundraising then they probably would have kicked her out anyway. But that doesn't seem to be the case does it? I expect Faithlily probably believes that Missing People is wholly funded by the Madeleine Fund now, just to give Kate some kudos and publicity. <<< Insert rolling eyed smiley here also.
-
You'd think if the families of missing people objected to Kate McCann representing themselves and the charity they'd have brought a considerable amount of pressure on the charity to kick her out wouldn't you? In fact, if Kate's appointment to ambassador for Missing People was so toxic that it was having a knock on effect on fundraising then they probably would have kicked her out anyway. But that doesn't seem to be the case does it? I expect Faithlily probably believes that Missing People is wholly funded by the Madeleine Fund now, just to give Kate some kudos and publicity. <<< Insert rolling eyed smiley here also.
I doubt "The Fund" has pulled in the £5.6MM that would be necessary to cover donations for FYs 2012;2013 & 2014. <<<< insert rolling eyes smiley here >>>>
But I prefer these two little geezers 8(>(( &
*&*%£
-
Personally I think charities have definitely lost touch with public feeling and nowhere is this more obvious than with the bestowing of a Global Legacy award by Save the Children on Tony Blair.
There is already a petition with 100,000 signatures opposing Blairs award....no public outcry against Kate
-
There is already a petition with 100,000 signatures opposing Blairs award....no public outcry against Kate
Oh, but you're mistaken Davel, look at the huge public backlash about Kate's appointment as demonstrated by this petition http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/kate-mccann-should-not-be-an-ambassador-for @)(++(*
-
Oh, but you're mistaken Davel, look at the huge public backlash about Kate's appointment as demonstrated by this petition http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/kate-mccann-should-not-be-an-ambassador-for @)(++(*
Is that really TEN signatures in a year?
I think that probably ranks as a huge public endorsement of Dr McCann's position as an ambassador for the charity Missing People.
-
Is that really TEN signatures in a year?
I think that probably ranks as a huge public endorsement of Dr McCann's position as an ambassador for the charity Missing People.
Or it might just be that no one but we people interested in the case give a fig either way, whadda ya think ?
-
Is that really TEN signatures in a year?
I think that probably ranks as a huge public endorsement of Dr McCann's position as an ambassador for the charity Missing People.
It's certainly a good indicator of the depth of public fury and outrage there has(n't) been about the appointment, despite its wide publicity.
-
More likely it indicates that apart from a few forum junkies the general populace don't give a rat's arse.
-
Oh, but you're mistaken Davel, look at the huge public backlash about Kate's appointment as demonstrated by this petition http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/kate-mccann-should-not-be-an-ambassador-for @)(++(*
Stephen H
Are you really Jane?
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/kate-mccann-should-not-be-an-ambassador-for
Discussion comment on the petition
Jane Hancock
6 months ago
No-one I know leaves their children alone in a strange place to go out boozing night after night. Truly neglectful.
8(>(( *&*%£