Why Should We Believe the Parent’s When....?

[Brietta]

Madeleine McCann allegedly disappeared into thin air while her parents were out. They were the last people to see her. They have spent 12 years insisting that she was taken by a stranger.  There's no hard evidence supporting their claim, however.  As a result the story relies heavily on their credibility. If some of the things they say don't  add up that damages their credibility and therefore their story.

I don't see how Amaral's 'unworthiness' affected the PJ investigation into Madeleine's disappearabce at all.

Madeleine did not vanish into thin air.  An eye witness saw a child being carried away from the apartment block at the relevant time ... a person who was carrying a child was traced 'hiding in full sight' by SY in 2013 ... why no questions for him in 2007?

[Brietta]

Further Kate admitted lying even though she knew there was witnesses that could contradict her.....so being found out doesn’t seem to be a deterrent.

Cite to establish the context of that allegation please.

[Eleanor]

You're forgetting one critical little point, Gerry said they ALMOST thought about not going. You can't almost think about anything, which proves he made it up when they DID think about it because at the time of the interview he knew it was completely untrue.

He's thinks we're all daft IMO. But a blatant lie is a blatant lie at the end of the day, and him and his wife have just been caught out lovely.

I often almost think about doing a lot of things, especially on this Forum.

By the way, your comment is Libellous.  I shall be Deleting In Full, any further comments in this vein.  No almost about it.

[Eleanor]

If you the truth makes you feel that bad I'll go and delete it in full for you in right now.

Comme tu ver.  Your comment says more about you than I would dare to.  Just be a bit more careful.  Merci Beaucoup.

[Holly Goodhead]

Madeleine did not vanish into thin air.  An eye witness saw a child being carried away from the apartment block at the relevant time ... a person who was carrying a child was traced 'hiding in full sight' by SY in 2013 ... why no questions for him in 2007?

If you are referring to the JT sighting then my understanding is SY identified a man carrying his daughter around the time time of JT's sighting? 

If someone abducted a child it's unlikely they would simply walk off with him/her in their arms and PJ may well have thought it was a red herring as it turned out to be.

Having spent some time looking at the case of Jill Dando I don't rate SY at all.  If this case is anything to go by they make Dad's Army look like the SAS! 

[faithlilly]

Cite to establish the context of that allegation please.

You know the context. Kate admitted that she lied in her book. If you have a problem with that can I suggest that you take it up with the author.

[faithlilly]

It has certainly become apparent that even when faced with undeniable evidence that the parents committed some wrongdoing supporters will still deny the calumny.

It is rather like Donald Trump when he said that he could shoot someone and his supporters would still support him.

What I really don’t understand is that many of the ardent supporters, it appears,  are professional, intelligent people yet continue to believe whatever the parents say, no matter how ridiculous.

[Erngath]

You know the context. Kate admitted that she lied in her book. If you have a problem with that can I suggest that you take it up with the author.

I lie every day!
Just told one in a text to American second cousins who are visiting Scotland and want to meet up.
We've made arrangements but I told them a lie to make it easier for me to prepare their dinner at a time which suits me.
 I wouldn't commit perjury though.

[Brietta]

If you are referring to the JT sighting then my understanding is SY identified a man carrying his daughter around the time time of JT's sighting? 

If someone abducted a child it's unlikely they would simply walk off with him/her in their arms and PJ may well have thought it was a red herring as it turned out to be.

Having spent some time looking at the case of Jill Dando I don't rate SY at all.  If this case is anything to go by they make Dad's Army look like the SAS!

How could the PJ make any evaluation of a witness statement without checking it out to its conclusion?  They were apparently incapable of checking creche records and discovering which parents were likely to be out and about carrying children of Madeleine's age at the time of her disappearance ... and despite Dr Totman informing police in Portugal at the time of his whereabouts, they never spoke to him!

The present investigations will know ... but we most certainly do not ... if the man Jane saw has been identified as being Dr Totman.

[Holly Goodhead]

You are discovering that 'truth' in this case ultimately comes down to opinion. As the PJ said;

 the facts occurred on the day 3 of May of 2007, in a temporal hiatus, understood to be between 21H05 and 22H00 (being certain that after 17H30, only GERALD and KATE had contact with MADELEINE)
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/P_J_FINAL_REPORT.htm

Yes most will be down to opinion but not all.  I see these cases like jigsaw puzzles where the corners and borders are the facts capable of withstanding scrutiny.  These pieces need to be found first and then the other pieces will fall into place.

[G-Unit]

Madeleine did not vanish into thin air.  An eye witness saw a child being carried away from the apartment block at the relevant time ... a person who was carrying a child was traced 'hiding in full sight' by SY in 2013 ... why no questions for him in 2007?

An eye witness saw a man carrying a child, but it hasn't been connected to Madeleine's disappearance except by the witness, the McCanns and, it seems, you.

[Erngath]

It has certainly become apparent that even when faced with undeniable evidence that the parents committed some wrongdoing supporters will still deny the calumny.

It is rather like Donald Trump when he said that he could shoot someone and his supporters would still support him.

What I really don’t understand is that many of the ardent supporters, it appears,  are professional, intelligent people yet continue to believe whatever the parents say, no matter how ridiculous. Perhaps it’s an age thing ?

There's that ageism thing again.
My grandchildren are much, much younger than you, I believe.
Thankfully they are not so blinkered in their appreciation of the wisdom which all their grandparents bring into their lives.

[Lace]

Fact..Gerry said that they weren’t sure that they’d get into the tapas bar that night...the files show us that the group had booked a table for every night that week...ergo, he lied.

Why he lied is opinion.....that he lied is not.

Could it be that they thought they wouldn't get into the tapas bar that night BEFORE it was booked for the week?

[Holly Goodhead]

How could the PJ make any evaluation of a witness statement without checking it out to its conclusion?  They were apparently incapable of checking creche records and discovering which parents were likely to be out and about carrying children of Madeleine's age at the time of her disappearance ... and despite Dr Totman informing police in Portugal at the time of his whereabouts, they never spoke to him!

The present investigations will know ... but we most certainly do not ... if the man Jane saw has been identified as being Dr Totman.

From the cases I've looked at in any detail (UK and NZ) there's always incompetence and negligence much room for improvement!

[faithlilly]

I lie every day!
Just told one in a text to American second cousins who are visiting Scotland and want to meet up.
We've made arrangements but I told them a lie to make it easier for me to prepare their dinner at a time which suits me.
 I wouldn't commit perjury though.

It’s not about perjury, it’s about credibility.