Author Topic: A message from Kate McCann  (Read 5584 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

stephen25000

  • Guest
Re: A message from Kate McCann
« Reply #15 on: April 05, 2013, 01:22:48 PM »

Kate McCann exercised her legal right as an Arguida not to answer what were insulting questions designed to implicate her.
And if you read The Questions properly you will see that she had already answered several of them on a previous occasion.  It states this in The Questions.
None of The Questions were designed to help find Madeleine.


Who are you to say they are insulting questions ?

Try to remember it was the UK police  who suggested the PJ investigated the Mccanns.

In any investigation questions have to be asked, whether a potential suspect likes them or not.

ALL potential suspects will be answered awkward questions.

Why should the Mccanns have been any different.

All suspects have a legal right to refuse to answer. And a lot of people do refuse.

I note that you are not interested in the fact that Kate had already answered several of them on a previous occasion.


Which questions ?

When ?

and what were the answers ?

stephen25000

  • Guest
Re: A message from Kate McCann
« Reply #16 on: April 05, 2013, 01:26:46 PM »
I think Maddie is dead. But what happened to her, and by whom, im undecided.

 
as part of this i'll refer to little Ben Needham...
 
i really felt that they would find his body under that pile of earth and rubble , it would have solved a 22 year old mystery and might have gone some way to explaining Maddy's disappearance.  i find it hard to beleive that someone can vanish for that length of time unless they were dead.
so the same applies to Maddy. if she hasnt been seen of since 2007 then surely she must be dead



Check out the following who all turned up years later:

Jaycee Lee Dugard

Natascha Kampusch

Elisabeth Fritzl

Also Claudia Lawrence who went missing from Leeds in 2009 is still missing.

In what ways are the cases comparable exactly ?

Is that a serious question?

Are you not aware of the basic similarity that these were missing people/children who have after considerable time been found?  They were missing, there was no evidence of their deaths, they were potentially findable. In their cases thankfully they were found.

Madeleine McCann is missing. There is no evidence of her death. She may possibly be found in the future.

If you cannot see that similarity then...

No you misunderstand.

In what ways were there similarities in the 'disappearances'  ?

Also, of course, she may never be found.

Do you support funding to parents from the state for all missing children, with the same level of financial involvement offered ( over 3.8 million at the current estimate ), or are the Mccanns a separate case ?

Offline Luz

Re: A message from Kate McCann
« Reply #17 on: April 05, 2013, 01:28:50 PM »

Kate McCann exercised her legal right as an Arguida not to answer what were insulting questions designed to implicate her.
And if you read The Questions properly you will see that she had already answered several of them on a previous occasion.  It states this in The Questions.
None of The Questions were designed to help find Madeleine.

Who are you to say they are insulting questions ?

Try to remember it was the UK police  who suggested the PJ investigated the Mccanns.

In any investigation questions have to be asked, whether a potential suspect likes them or not.

ALL potential suspects will be answered awkward questions.

Why should the Mccanns have been any different.

All suspects have a legal right to refuse to answer. And a lot of people do refuse.

I note that you are not interested in the fact that Kate had already answered several of them on a previous occasion.

Yes, as an Arguida she had a legal right to refuse to answer any questions. But I ask you, if your child was missing would you not co-operate with the police that you wished would find your daughter?!

And by the way, their (hers and her husband and friends) testimonies were a "joke". I could not believe that people that had a child missing could be so stupid as that - and they were supposed to be literate.
« Last Edit: April 05, 2013, 01:32:25 PM by Luz »

debunker

  • Guest
Re: A message from Kate McCann
« Reply #18 on: April 05, 2013, 01:31:29 PM »
The line of questioning indicated that they were trying to fit her up. Any solicitor would recommend a 'no comment' response to such intimidating questions.

Offline gilet

Re: A message from Kate McCann
« Reply #19 on: April 05, 2013, 01:33:04 PM »
I think Maddie is dead. But what happened to her, and by whom, im undecided.

 
as part of this i'll refer to little Ben Needham...
 
i really felt that they would find his body under that pile of earth and rubble , it would have solved a 22 year old mystery and might have gone some way to explaining Maddy's disappearance.  i find it hard to beleive that someone can vanish for that length of time unless they were dead.
so the same applies to Maddy. if she hasnt been seen of since 2007 then surely she must be dead



Check out the following who all turned up years later:

Jaycee Lee Dugard

Natascha Kampusch

Elisabeth Fritzl

Also Claudia Lawrence who went missing from Leeds in 2009 is still missing.

In what ways are the cases comparable exactly ?

Is that a serious question?

Are you not aware of the basic similarity that these were missing people/children who have after considerable time been found?  They were missing, there was no evidence of their deaths, they were potentially findable. In their cases thankfully they were found.

Madeleine McCann is missing. There is no evidence of her death. She may possibly be found in the future.

If you cannot see that similarity then...

No you misunderstand.

In what ways were there similarities in the 'disappearances'  ?

Also, of course, she may never be found.

Do you support funding to parents from the state for all missing children, with the same level of financial involvement offered ( over 3.8 million at the current estimate ), or are the Mccanns a separate case ?

I did not misunderstand at all. That is simply untrue.

I responded correctly to the question you posed in the earlier post.

It maybe that you did not phrase your original question properly.

You have now chosen to alter significantly the question posed.

And you have added a further entirely separate question.

I will consider the questions you have now posed and answer when I have thought about them.

In the meantime I hope you accept that my response to your original question was not due to misunderstanding. It would be interesting to see you respecting my actual response with a reply instead of merely ignoring it and posing different questions.

debunker

  • Guest
Re: A message from Kate McCann
« Reply #20 on: April 05, 2013, 01:35:47 PM »

Kate McCann exercised her legal right as an Arguida not to answer what were insulting questions designed to implicate her.
And if you read The Questions properly you will see that she had already answered several of them on a previous occasion.  It states this in The Questions.
None of The Questions were designed to help find Madeleine.

Who are you to say they are insulting questions ?


Try to remember it was the UK police  who suggested the PJ investigated the Mccanns.

In any investigation questions have to be asked, whether a potential suspect likes them or not.



ALL potential suspects will be answered awkward questions.

Why should the Mccanns have been any different.


0
All suspects have a legal right to refuse to answer. And a lot of people do refuse.

I note that you are not interested in the fact that Kate had already answered several of them on a previous occasion.




Yes, as an Arguida she had a legal right to refuse to answer any questions. But I ask you, if your child was missing would you not co-operate with the police that you wished would find your daughter?!

And by the way, their (hers and her husband and friends) testimonies were a "joke". I could not believe that people that had a child missing could be so stupid as that - and they were supposed to be literate.


YOu recall their testimonies as a "joke".

WOuld you give examples with cites please.

stephen25000

  • Guest
Re: A message from Kate McCann
« Reply #21 on: April 05, 2013, 01:38:27 PM »
I think Maddie is dead. But what happened to her, and by whom, im undecided.

 
as part of this i'll refer to little Ben Needham...
 
i really felt that they would find his body under that pile of earth and rubble , it would have solved a 22 year old mystery and might have gone some way to explaining Maddy's disappearance.  i find it hard to beleive that someone can vanish for that length of time unless they were dead.
so the same applies to Maddy. if she hasnt been seen of since 2007 then surely she must be dead



Check out the following who all turned up years later:

Jaycee Lee Dugard

Natascha Kampusch

Elisabeth Fritzl

Also Claudia Lawrence who went missing from Leeds in 2009 is still missing.

In what ways are the cases comparable exactly ?

Is that a serious question?

Are you not aware of the basic similarity that these were missing people/children who have after considerable time been found?  They were missing, there was no evidence of their deaths, they were potentially findable. In their cases thankfully they were found.

Madeleine McCann is missing. There is no evidence of her death. She may possibly be found in the future.

If you cannot see that similarity then...

No you misunderstand.

In what ways were there similarities in the 'disappearances'  ?

Also, of course, she may never be found.

Do you support funding to parents from the state for all missing children, with the same level of financial involvement offered ( over 3.8 million at the current estimate ), or are the Mccanns a separate case ?

I did not misunderstand at all. That is simply untrue.

I responded correctly to the question you posed in the earlier post.

It maybe that you did not phrase your original question properly.

You have now chosen to alter significantly the question posed.

And you have added a further entirely separate question.

I will consider the questions you have now posed and answer when I have thought about them.

In the meantime I hope you accept that my response to your original question was not due to misunderstanding. It would be interesting to see you respecting my actual response with a reply instead of merely ignoring it and posing different questions.

No problem.

I wasn't being rude.

 I just don't believe after very nearly 6 years and not one trace of Madeleine that she will be found,m despite the worldwide publicity, and to be quite frank, which other  missing child case in history has had the same level of publicity as this one ?

Offline gilet

Re: A message from Kate McCann
« Reply #22 on: April 05, 2013, 01:39:14 PM »
I think Maddie is dead. But what happened to her, and by whom, im undecided.

 
as part of this i'll refer to little Ben Needham...
 
i really felt that they would find his body under that pile of earth and rubble , it would have solved a 22 year old mystery and might have gone some way to explaining Maddy's disappearance.  i find it hard to beleive that someone can vanish for that length of time unless they were dead.
so the same applies to Maddy. if she hasnt been seen of since 2007 then surely she must be dead



Check out the following who all turned up years later:

Jaycee Lee Dugard

Natascha Kampusch

Elisabeth Fritzl

Also Claudia Lawrence who went missing from Leeds in 2009 is still missing.

In what ways are the cases comparable exactly ?

Is that a serious question?

Are you not aware of the basic similarity that these were missing people/children who have after considerable time been found?  They were missing, there was no evidence of their deaths, they were potentially findable. In their cases thankfully they were found.

Madeleine McCann is missing. There is no evidence of her death. She may possibly be found in the future.

If you cannot see that similarity then...

No you misunderstand.

In what ways were there similarities in the 'disappearances'  ?

Also, of course, she may never be found.

Do you support funding to parents from the state for all missing children, with the same level of financial involvement offered ( over 3.8 million at the current estimate ), or are the Mccanns a separate case ?

I did not misunderstand at all. That is simply untrue.

I responded correctly to the question you posed in the earlier post.

It maybe that you did not phrase your original question properly.

You have now chosen to alter significantly the question posed.

And you have added a further entirely separate question.

I will consider the questions you have now posed and answer when I have thought about them.

In the meantime I hope you accept that my response to your original question was not due to misunderstanding. It would be interesting to see you respecting my actual response with a reply instead of merely ignoring it and posing different questions.

No problem.

I wasn't being rude.

 iIjust don't believe after very nearly 6 years and not one trace of Madeleine that she will be found,m despite the worldwide publicity, and to be quite frank, which other  missing child case in history has had the same level of publicity as this one ?

None has had that level of publicity but there are two potential views. That there is no hope and that there is a possibility that she may be found. I prefer the latter. You clearly have decided on the former.
« Last Edit: April 05, 2013, 01:41:32 PM by gilet »

Offline gilet

Re: A message from Kate McCann
« Reply #23 on: April 05, 2013, 01:42:35 PM »

Kate McCann exercised her legal right as an Arguida not to answer what were insulting questions designed to implicate her.
And if you read The Questions properly you will see that she had already answered several of them on a previous occasion.  It states this in The Questions.
None of The Questions were designed to help find Madeleine.

Who are you to say they are insulting questions ?

Try to remember it was the UK police  who suggested the PJ investigated the Mccanns.

In any investigation questions have to be asked, whether a potential suspect likes them or not.

ALL potential suspects will be answered awkward questions.

Why should the Mccanns have been any different.

All suspects have a legal right to refuse to answer. And a lot of people do refuse.

I note that you are not interested in the fact that Kate had already answered several of them on a previous occasion.

Yes, as an Arguida she had a legal right to refuse to answer any questions. But I ask you, if your child was missing would you not co-operate with the police that you wished would find your daughter?!

And by the way, their (hers and her husband and friends) testimonies were a "joke". I could not believe that people that had a child missing could be so stupid as that - and they were supposed to be literate.


Kate McCann exercised her legal right as an Arguida not to answer what were insulting questions designed to implicate her.
And if you read The Questions properly you will see that she had already answered several of them on a previous occasion.  It states this in The Questions.
None of The Questions were designed to help find Madeleine.

Who are you to say they are insulting questions ?

Try to remember it was the UK police  who suggested the PJ investigated the Mccanns.

In any investigation questions have to be asked, whether a potential suspect likes them or not.

ALL potential suspects will be answered awkward questions.

Why should the Mccanns have been any different.

All suspects have a legal right to refuse to answer. And a lot of people do refuse.

I note that you are not interested in the fact that Kate had already answered several of them on a previous occasion.

Yes, as an Arguida she had a legal right to refuse to answer any questions. But I ask you, if your child was missing would you not co-operate with the police that you wished would find your daughter?!

And by the way, their (hers and her husband and friends) testimonies were a "joke". I could not believe that people that had a child missing could be so stupid as that - and they were supposed to be literate.

My own view is that she was entirely within her rights to refuse to answer the questiions. And knowing what she then knew about the direction of the investigation (that it was focused entirely on her as responsible for her childs death) would you have been so willing to answer the questions which were posed and which had no bearing whatsoever on the finding of the child? It is perfectly clear from the questions that anyone knowing themself to be innocent would refuse to answer questions which had no bearing on the search for an abductor. Can you not see that?

As for your comment about the testimonies being a "joke". It appears to be another of your non-expert, expert opinions. Can you explain please what makes these testimonies the "joke" you claim or are you unable to support that claim with evidence?

Online Eleanor

Re: A message from Kate McCann
« Reply #24 on: April 05, 2013, 03:45:26 PM »

Kate McCann exercised her legal right as an Arguida not to answer what were insulting questions designed to implicate her.
And if you read The Questions properly you will see that she had already answered several of them on a previous occasion.  It states this in The Questions.
None of The Questions were designed to help find Madeleine.


Who are you to say they are insulting questions ?

Try to remember it was the UK police  who suggested the PJ investigated the Mccanns.

In any investigation questions have to be asked, whether a potential suspect likes them or not.

ALL potential suspects will be answered awkward questions.

Why should the Mccanns have been any different.

All suspects have a legal right to refuse to answer. And a lot of people do refuse.

I note that you are not interested in the fact that Kate had already answered several of them on a previous occasion.


Which questions ?

When ?

and what were the answers ?

You mean that you haven't read The 48 Questions?  Some of them refer to Kate's previous answers.

Sadly, The PJ don't appear to have recorded Kate's answers, and her answers do not appear in The Files.