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

[Luz]

I've never been able to post any comment in a british newspaper. Maybe, because my IP denounces me from being from Portugal I'm literally boycotted.

[stephen25000]

right again..there are so many poor teachers...have you not heard of random samples...that would be a true representation of the british public

Don't be foolish, I am fully aware of random sampling, and when and where to apply it.

P.S. If you start your insults, yet again, it just shows what you are.

So davel and aiofe, do you think the 'mail' represents a random sample of public opinion ?

[Mr Gray]

Don't be foolish, I am fully aware of random sampling, and when and where to apply it.

P.S. If you start your insults, yet again, it just shows what you are.

So davel, do you think the 'mail' represents a random sample of public opinion ?

of course not

[Aiofe]

Before Madeleine went missing, according to auntie Philomena, the couple had financial difficulties. When going to the Ocean Club in 2007, Mr. McCann obtained a discount in an already cheap resort, because there was no "hearing" service for the kiddies.

After Madeleine was missing, Mr and Mrs traveled on private jets, when commercial, always in first class and always chose 5 star hotels. Quite a change, wouldn't you say?!

You will of course provide cites for 'financial difficulties', and discounts for the holiday......

I suspect we shall wait a long time.

[Aiofe]

You are playing with words.

You stated the comments are representative, I gave reasons why they aren't.

As to your above example, irrelevant in the circumstances.

Why shouldn't the yahoo comments be taken as well as the mails ?

I pity your students who are being ill taught if you believe that tosh.

[stephen25000]

I pity your students who are being ill taught if you believe that tosh.

 I pity you if you believe the mail is representative of public opinion.

Mind you, some people can't be helped.

[Aiofe]

I pity you if you believe the mail is representative of public opinion.

Mind you, some people can't be helped.

The mail probably has the closest demographic to the entire population of any newspaper; only TV or Radio would be a closer fit. It also has a massive readership beyond its sales.

I suspect that if the votes supported your views, you would be singing the Mail's praises!

[stephen25000]

The mail probably has the closest demographic to the entire population of any newspaper; only TV or Radio would be a closer fit. It also has a massive readership beyond its sales.

I suspect that if the votes supported your views, you would be singing the Mail's praises!

I presume you have the statistics to back up your claim on the Mail's readership ?

Bearing in mind it is , to put it mildly, it is a right-wing newspaper, therefore hardly representative of public opinion across the UK.

[ferryman]

So I've read this thread with steadily mounting disbelief, but I'm not sure why (my disbelief steadily mounted).

It's just the same old, same old from most posters.

Of course the McCanns didn't release that e-fit.

They had no remit or authority to do so.

This efit (of a man seen carrying a child in the vicinity of apartment 5a on the night of the crime) was delivered to the McCanns something like 3 months after the original investigation that exonerated the McCanns had been shelved!

What if that man turns out to be an innocent holidaymaker carrying his child back to an apartment, same as the man Jane Tanner saw turned out to be?

Where would the McCanns stand releasing an efit of an innocent holiday-maker or Portuguese resident on evening May 3rd, after the original investigation had been shelved?  No doubt, the self-righteous bile now being churned out by the usual suspects would, instead, accuse the McCanns of fingering an innocent man.

And another question.  Mr Smith was billed by Amaral as the crucial witness who would cement the case and prove the culpability of the McCanns.

Why did not his team trouble to take an e-fit from Mr Smith?  They did of the man Jane Tanner saw ...

[Cariad]

What about all the other efit's they released at press conferences and the like? Cooperman was after the investigation was shelved wasn't he?

[ferryman]

What about all the other efit's they released at press conferences and the like? Cooperman was after the investigation was shelved wasn't he?

Were they seen carrying a child in the vicinity of apartment 5a on the night Madeleine was abducted?

[Redblossom]

What about all the other efit's they released at press conferences and the like? Cooperman was after the investigation was shelved wasn't he?

No he wasnt, he was in jan 2008 but vicky beckham was 2009 long after the shelving

The mccanns have always said they believe smithman was the same as tannerman so no reason at all not to include him/his efits in their campaign......

[Cariad]

Were they seen carrying a child in the vicinity of apartment 5a on the night Madeleine was abducted?

Oh, so you can release e-fits of innocent people as long as they're not carrying a child? That is truly bizarre logic!

No he wasnt, he was in jan 2008 but vicky beckham was 2009 long after the shelving

The mccanns have always said they believe smithman was the same as tannerman so no reason at all not to include him/his efits in their campaign......

Thanks Red. I agree, I can't think of any reason not to include them.

[stephen25000]

You are rather sad. The Daily Mail is a right wing paper in a right wing country. It has the greatest spread of any paper.

Rubbish.

That includes the vast majority of the Mail's content.

So as to sad...........................

[AnneGuedes]

No he wasnt, he was in jan 2008 but vicky beckham was 2009 long after the shelving

The mccanns have always said they believe smithman was the same as tannerman so no reason at all not to include him/his efits in their campaign......

Absolutely ! At least the e-fits could provide a double face, like Janus, to Tannerman who, in spite of classic shoes, dark in color, with a heel perhaps a bit higher than normal and a white pyjama with little flowers or perhaps little birds and a frill.... conveniently had none !