Does publicly "doubting" the McCanns add to the distress of the McCann family?

[Alfred R Jones]

It is a rather grand claim I have to say. In most cases police conclusions can only be questioned after the event. The McCann case is very different because people have access to the initial case files. So when Operation Grange cleared 'Tannerman' people were able to point out that he was going the wrong way if he was a dad taking his child home from the creche. When they kind of hinted that the Smith family helped to create the efits shown on Crimewatch the files said different. I see this as a good thing as it may keep the police on their toes and ensure they get their facts right. In fact these two examples suggest to me that the Met. police may have an entirely undeserved reputation as an excellent force! We would know nothing if it wasn't for the internet as the McCanns silenced any doubts expressed by the mainstream media .

Yes Alfred. I'm a lot of things but a coward isn't one of them. I would be perfectly comfortable informing the McCann's relatives that I have doubts about their story, but I probably wouldn't be crass enough to do it at a social function unless they raised the matter first, then I would reply.

I would not discuss this case with children except in the simplest of terms. If my children found out details from others I would discuss it with them and make sure they had a balanced view. Hopefully they would be brought up well enough not to bait others at a party and if they did so they would be in trouble with me. (I do have some,  the youngest is 46)

You may view it as cowardly not to inform perfectly innocent people of your suspicious views regarding their nearest and dearest, I however regard it as a) good manners not to b) none of my business in the first place and c) preferable not to cause distress to others simply for the sake of airing my "doubts" publicly.

[Brietta]

It is a rather grand claim I have to say. In most cases police conclusions can only be questioned after the event. The McCann case is very different because people have access to the initial case files. So when Operation Grange cleared 'Tannerman' people were able to point out that he was going the wrong way if he was a dad taking his child home from the creche. When they kind of hinted that the Smith family helped to create the efits shown on Crimewatch the files said different. I see this as a good thing as it may keep the police on their toes and ensure they get their facts right. In fact these two examples suggest to me that the Met. police may have an entirely undeserved reputation as an excellent force! We would know nothing if it wasn't for the internet as the McCanns silenced any doubts expressed by the mainstream media .

Yes Alfred. I'm a lot of things but a coward isn't one of them. I would be perfectly comfortable informing the McCann's relatives that I have doubts about their story, but I probably wouldn't be crass enough to do it at a social function unless they raised the matter first, then I would reply.

I would not discuss this case with children except in the simplest of terms. If my children found out details from others I would discuss it with them and make sure they had a balanced view. Hopefully they would be brought up well enough not to bait others at a party and if they did so they would be in trouble with me. (I do have some,  the youngest is 46)

I think your first paragraph epitomises exactly the flaws in the investigation into Madeleine McCann's case.

for example ... witness statements given in what should have been confidence have been broadcast to all and sundry ... do you have any idea of the risk that represents to clearly identified individuals?

[Alice Purjorick]

They definitely do have that sense of entitlement however unlikely the result, or else why do they continue to do it?

That is something I find quite baffling. Maybe they are Laputans.

[carlymichelle]

I think your first paragraph epitomises exactly the flaws in the investigation into Madeleine McCann's case.

for example ... witness statements given in what should have been confidence have been broadcast to all and sundry ... do you have any idea of the risk that represents to clearly identified individuals?

what about the risk  the mcanns did leaving 3 toddlers alone?? does that mean nothing?

[carlymichelle]

That is something I find quite baffling. Maybe they are Laputans.

maybe it isa weird version of munchusions by proxy??

[G-Unit]

I think your first paragraph epitomises exactly the flaws in the investigation into Madeleine McCann's case.

for example ... witness statements given in what should have been confidence have been broadcast to all and sundry ... do you have any idea of the risk that represents to clearly identified individuals?

Do you think the UK system of secrecy is superior then? It allows no rebuttal of nonsense claims by the police, certainly. Many witnesses in many different cases in the UK have had no qualms about speaking to the press and being identified. Many witnesses in this case have spoken to the press but not to the police. I have seen no reports of harm being done to any of the witnesses in this case. Have you?

[Brietta]

Do you think the UK system of secrecy is superior then? It allows no rebuttal of nonsense claims by the police, certainly. Many witnesses in many different cases in the UK have had no qualms about speaking to the press and being identified. Many witnesses in this case have spoken to the press but not to the police. I have seen no reports of harm being done to any of the witnesses in this case. Have you?

Do you think it is Portuguese practice to publish case files on the internet?

Do you think breaching the confidentiality of witnesses who had no choice in the matter is acceptable?

[Lyall]

Do you think it is Portuguese practice to publish case files on the internet?

Do you think breaching the confidentiality of witnesses who had no choice in the matter is acceptable?

They didn't publish them on the internet, they merely provided information for selected journalists?

[Brietta]

They didn't publish them on the internet, they merely provided information for selected journalists?

The persons responsible for putting them on the internet were in breach of the strict Portuguese laws ... it appears these laws have been somewhat brought into disrepute by the fact no-one has been prosecuted for the breach of protocol.


I believe it is the norm for legal personnel and accredited journalists to be shown case files ... can you give another instance involving the publication of such files anywhere?

[Lyall]

The persons responsible for putting them on the internet were in breach of the strict Portuguese laws ... it appears these laws have been somewhat brought into disrepute by the fact no-one has been prosecuted for the breach of protocol.


I believe it is the norm for legal personnel and accredited journalists to be shown case files ... can you give another instance involving the publication of such files anywhere?

There are plenty of them in the US, with amount of information made public/given to media depending on which state it is and what that state's FOI laws are.

[G-Unit]

The persons responsible for putting them on the internet were in breach of the strict Portuguese laws ... it appears these laws have been somewhat brought into disrepute by the fact no-one has been prosecuted for the breach of protocol.


I believe it is the norm for legal personnel and accredited journalists to be shown case files ... can you give another instance involving the publication of such files anywhere?

I didn't know that, and all I can find is a reference to them being released to the public. Do you have a link to anything on the actual law which has been breached?

[Brietta]

I didn't know that, and all I can find is a reference to them being released to the public. Do you have a link to anything on the actual law which has been breached?

The Judicial Secrecy law ??? which subsection it may be I have no idea ... I am sure the information about it will be out there somewhere or perhaps another poster can direct you to it.

From reading, information in case files is given out to interested parties at the discretion of a judge ... if you can provide cites for other instances where case files have ended up on the internet I would be interested, I can find none and can only presume this to be another unique factor in Madeleine McCann's case.

[G-Unit]

You may view it as cowardly not to inform perfectly innocent people of your suspicious views regarding their nearest and dearest, I however regard it as a) good manners not to b) none of my business in the first place and c) preferable not to cause distress to others simply for the sake of airing my "doubts" publicly.

You asked if I would be comfortable telling them of my doubts and I said I would, although not at the venue you suggested unless they raised it first. In fact, my good manners would prevent me from raising the subject at all. It would be cowardly of me if they raised the subject and I agreed with whatever they said, but I would probably only speak up if the alternative was to mislead them.

If it's none of your business why are you here?

I'm pleased that you're so concerned about others, but you are involved in the continuing discussion of the case on the internet. That must, by keeping the discussion going, contribute to any distress caused surely? Perhaps you think your support is noticed and appreciated by the McCann family? I would guess they lump us all in together myself.

[Anna]

The Judicial Secrecy law ??? which subsection it may be I have no idea ... I am sure the information about it will be out there somewhere or perhaps another poster can direct you to it.

From reading, information in case files is given out to interested parties at the discretion of a judge ... if you can provide cites for other instances where case files have ended up on the internet I would be interested, I can find none and can only presume this to be another unique factor in Madeleine McCann's case.

Some useful info here=

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=3835.msg144149#msg144149

[G-Unit]

The Judicial Secrecy law ??? which subsection it may be I have no idea ... I am sure the information about it will be out there somewhere or perhaps another poster can direct you to it.

From reading, information in case files is given out to interested parties at the discretion of a judge ... if you can provide cites for other instances where case files have ended up on the internet I would be interested, I can find none and can only presume this to be another unique factor in Madeleine McCann's case.

You have no idea? Perhaps someone else can direct me to it? You are the one who said;

"The persons responsible for putting them on the internet were in breach of the strict Portuguese laws ... it appears these laws have been somewhat brought into disrepute by the fact no-one has been prosecuted for the breach of protocol"

Surely the one making a statement about a breach of Portugese law is the one who should be directing others to the information upon which they based their declaration?