Has the McCann's Actions Turned a Supportive Public Against Them ?

[Conkers]

The reason that the Portuguese authorities didn't charge the parents with neglect was because that initial charge would have negated a further charge and they knew where they were going with the case.

[Aiofe]

The reason that the Portuguese authorities didn't charge the parents with neglect was because that initial charge would have negated a further charge and they knew where they were going with the case.

That is a myth created by [ censored word] early on to explain away why they were not charged. No-one has ever produced a reference to a law or administrative procedure that commands that. People have in the past produced other Portuguese cases of people being charged with more serious offences later in an investigation.

[colombosstogey]

I'm sure the "pro" posters will state that it isn't the case and the "[ censored word]" will claim the opposite.

As an neutral I can only say that the people who I have discussed the case with have all been rather negative toward the family. It is an emotive issue, on the one hand your heart goes out to the child and the parents. But on the other their behaviour just doesn't do them any favours at all.

If you want to be in the public eye, and the McCanns certainly want that, then you need to have good PR and they just don't - despite allegedly spending a fair few quid on it.

N

Good post.

Most people i have spoken to about it lately just shrug it all off they are totally fed up of hearing about it sadly. It was just like OVERKILL. Since the crimewatch and all the stuff about gypsies and blonde girls, and black tractor men, they are even more fed up with it, and dont buy into ANY OF IT.

Its like the Saville case sadly. A truly horrendous case which turned into something beyond comprehension with all the victims coming forward one after the other, the stories of saville almost floating along the hospital corridors with a fat cigar in his mouth seeking out his next victim, it became almost bizzare in its telling, and I think got to the stage where people started to switch off and doubt any of it.

Which is totally a shame for the victims of this man. The media just did them no favours non so ever.

The same with the PR and McCann media, it has become ludicrous with headlines like MADDY FOUND IN GREECE, etc.

People are just switching off.

There will never be justice for Madeleine because the Media and PR have their own agendas.

I mean really what is new? NOTHING oh apart from the fact that FINALLY OFFICIALLY the JT sighting was dismissed, after years and years of being brainwashed into thinking it was the abductor of the child. How sad is that. Years wasted.....for Maddy anyway. It seems that people in general forgot about the child. IF she is alive she has no chance of being found with all this media circus.....sadly.

[CPN]

OF course the distant is relevant... .thats why they weren't charged with neglect..50 yds or 5 miles may make no difference to you but it does to the authorities

Firstly, you omitted the relevant part of my post "they (the children) were out of sight and hearing, that was what mattered"

Secondly, how do you know why they weren't charged with neglect?  Do you have more information from the authorities than the rest of us do?  As I have previously explained, there are a number of reasons why parents are not actually charged in these situations - and no, I don't know which reason it was

[Mr Gray]

Firstly, you omitted the relevant part of my post "they (the children) were out of sight and hearing, that was what mattered"

Secondly, how do you know why they weren't charged with neglect?  Do you have more information from the authorities than the rest of us do?  As I have previously explained, there are a number of reasons why parents are not actually charged in these situations - and no, I don't know which reason it was

if you look at the archiving report you will see that the portuguese did not think them guilty of neglect. i have spoken to social workers recently and they have confirmed that their baby listening sevice did not amount to neglect. they told me they have a massive amount of cases to deal with of real neglect by parents.

[Aiofe]

Firstly, you omitted the relevant part of my post "they (the children) were out of sight and hearing, that was what mattered"

Secondly, how do you know why they weren't charged with neglect?  Do you have more information from the authorities than the rest of us do?  As I have previously explained, there are a number of reasons why parents are not actually charged in these situations - and no, I don't know which reason it was

FGS Read the Portuguese Law. The law on abandonment requires proof that the abandoners intended to leave the children alone permanently. They have no criminal law for what we would call neglect, only administrative law. The Police could not get any evidence against them as they would need to prove that they did not intend to return to them at all.

This was settled years ago and still raises its head as a myth every few months.

[Benice]

Firstly, you omitted the relevant part of my post "they (the children) were out of sight and hearing, that was what mattered"

Secondly, how do you know why they weren't charged with neglect?  Do you have more information from the authorities than the rest of us do?  As I have previously explained, there are a number of reasons why parents are not actually charged in these situations - and no, I don't know which reason it was

IIRC (from memory) They were not charged because their regular checking ruled out 'Intent to Abandon' which is a necessary criterium to prove 'neglect'.

[Mr Gray]

Firstly, you omitted the relevant part of my post "they (the children) were out of sight and hearing, that was what mattered"

Secondly, how do you know why they weren't charged with neglect?  Do you have more information from the authorities than the rest of us do?  As I have previously explained, there are a number of reasons why parents are not actually charged in these situations - and no, I don't know which reason it was

 You seem to have very little knowledge of the law for someone who claims to be an ex social worker

[CPN]

FGS Read the Portuguese Law. The law on abandonment requires proof that the abandoners intended to leave the children alone permanently. They have no criminal law for what we would call neglect, only administrative law. The Police could not get any evidence against them as they would need to prove that they did not intend to return to them at all.

This was settled years ago and still raises its head as a myth every few months.

No need to be rude.   I know about the proof of abandonment in Portugal aspect.  But people are often asking why the parents were not charged here in the UK and that is the aspect about which I have explained that other actions are also taken; but what would be taken into account in considering the actions to take - the fact that the children were out of sight and hearing would be the relevant part, not the actual distance (and other aspects also).

[sadie]

You are mixing running and walking up in your calculations.

And your distance is an underestimate.

Measure it on G Earth then Lyall and tell us what it is.  Make sure you keep close on the corners taking the shortest route that someone in a hurry would take.  Measure from where they sat to the patio doors.

Tell us what it measures Lyall.

[CPN]

You seem to have very little knowledge of the law for someone who claims to be an ex social worker

I don't pretend to know Portuguese law, except what I have read on this case.   I do know the British law on this which does not require abandonment.   But anyway I was not talking legally, I was talking about the relevant aspects of leaving the children in the apartment when I think about the situation they were in

[CPN]

Measure it on G Earth then Lyall and tell us what it is.  Make sure you keep close on the corners taking the shortest route that someone in a hurry would take.  Measure from where they sat to the patio doors.

Tell us what it measures Lyall.

But Sadie, I genuinely can't see that the exact distance matters.  The children were out of sight and hearing on unfamiliar territory - that is what matters to me

[BigFatBlonde]

if you look at the archiving report you will see that the portuguese did not think them guilty of neglect. i have spoken to social workers recently and they have confirmed that their baby listening sevice did not amount to neglect. they told me they have a massive amount of cases to deal with of real neglect by parents.

I doubt they have more cases to deal with now than they did 20 years ago - the reason there is a 'massive amount' of cases is because there are less social workers and they have to comply with a lot more procedure. So they have less social workers dealing with (procedurally) more complex cases.

N

[Aiofe]

No need to be rude.   I know about the proof of abandonment in Portugal aspect.  But people are often asking why the parents were not charged here in the UK and that is the aspect about which I have explained that other actions are also taken; but what would be taken into account in considering the actions to take - the fact that the children were out of sight and hearing would be the relevant part, not the actual distance (and other aspects also).

Are you sure you know child care law. If you did you would know that they could not be charged with neglect in England for something that happened abroad.

[sadie]

Aiofe

FGS Read the Portuguese Law. The law on abandonment requires proof that the abandoners intended to leave the children alone permanently. They have no criminal law for what we would call neglect, only administrative law. The Police could not get any evidence against them as they would need to prove that they did not intend to return to them at all.

This was settled years ago and still raises its head as a myth every few months.

No need to be rude.   I know about the proof of abandonment in Portugal aspect.  But people are often asking why the parents were not charged here in the UK and that is the aspect about which I have explained that other actions are also taken; but what would be taken into account in considering the actions to take - the fact that the children were out of sight and hearing would be the relevant part, not the actual distance (and other aspects also).

Nothing rude about what Aoife wrote, just FACT .... and a hint of exasperation, that the facts are being ignored.  Continually ignored.

Nothing rude at all.