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

[Lyall]

The files translated by 'volunteers' which we know are not only unreliable but which are incomplete.

&%+((£ But Summers and Swan say they are "quite accurate"?

[Alfred R Jones]

I am entitled to an opinion as are you. I can write and write replies to your accusations but I will never convince you of anything, I suspect, because you're RIGHT and I'm WRONG. I would be happy to debate the evidence with you, but you prefer to attack my motives and conclusions instead. I know nothing about what the McCann family feel about doubts being raised concerning the truth of their relatives' story, but I do my utmost to ensure that anything i say is based on evidence (not the mainstream media if possible because, believe it or not, they don't always tell the truth  ).

@Brietta

the files which are alleged to be unreliable.

"I am entitled" - yes, where have we heard that before??  It is your human right apparently to potentially cause distress to the family of a missing child by your actions and so you shall exercise that supposed right as you see fit - well, bully for you. 

There is very little to debate regarding the case with individuals who are unable to even cobble together a half way decent theory of parental involvement that is both coherent and plausible, until there is then I shall continue to shine a light on the antics and actions of the "doubters" themselves instead, because "I'm entitled to"

[Brietta]

&%+((£ But Summers and Swan say they are "quite accurate"?

They are entitled to their opinion.

[Lyall]

They are entitled to their opinion.

Are you alleging translations were done mischievously?

[ferryman]

Quoting opinion as fact again? Cites please.

I think we can be sure Stuart Prior wrote a report.

But we don't see it, so the files are incomplete.

Inaccurate?

The prosecutor's report.

Did they say (about the possibility of Madeleine being dead) that that is more likely?

Or did they ask which was more likely?

[Brietta]

Are you alleging translations were done mischievously?

Ehh??? where did that question spring from, Lyall, seems to be a non sequitur ... did you get the wrong answer to Summers and Swan?

[Brietta]

Quoting opinion as fact again? Cites please.

No ... quoting opinion formed by fact.

Is there any particular reason why you demand a cite for every other post I make?  Or is it only that my opinion does not mirror your opinion?

[Alice Purjorick]

Really?  Perhaps you could remind me who I was publicly accusing of being a liar who knows where the body is hidden, often and repeatedly - was I accusing a named person or an anonymous internet ID?  Perhaps you could stop pissing yourself for a moment to answer... 

Slippery as ever. By your definition of abuse you abused another poster; does it cease to be abuse because it is with made up names? I rather think not.
So what are your rules then Alf? Lay them out and we will play by them. Or do you just like to make them up as you go along?

[Alfred R Jones]

Slippery as ever. By your definition of abuse you abused another poster; does it cease to be abuse because it is with made up names? I rather think not.
So what are your rules then Alf? Lay them out and we will play by them. Or do you just like to make them up as you go along?

Firstly - spell out the abuse I am supposed to have meted out. Who was it to, and what did it consist of?  Did I libel this individual?  Did I accuse them of a heinous crime which had the potential to destroy their real-life reputation? How many times did I abuse this individual? When was this?  I have not received a sanction from the Mods for some time, and even then I don't believe it was for being abusive.

I await your reply with interest.

[Alfred R Jones]

My last warning on the forum was received on 1st Jan as follows:

Alfred R Jones,

You have received a warning for using inappropriate offensive language in some of your recent posts.

Please moderate your comments in future.

Regards,
The UK Justice Forum - Happy New Year! Team.

So, I said some rude words in my post-NYE hungover state, but was it directed at an individual?  I think not.  In any case calling you a f..king tw.. is not likely to cause you very much distress unless you are an extremely sensitive flower indeed.

[Carana]

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.

Several Portuguese court rulings are on the Internet, but redacted. I haven't yet come across any of the background files on any of those other cases.

I have occasionally come across some (redacted) case files from the US.

[Carana]

I think we can be sure Stuart Prior wrote a report.

But we don't see it, so the files are incomplete.

Inaccurate?

The prosecutor's report.

Did they say (about the possibility of Madeleine being dead) that that is more likely?

Or did they ask which was more likely?

I agree, the files are clearly not complete: much of the UK side has been kept off the DVD. Not really surprising after the UK went ballistic at the idea of their informal sharing of sensitive and confidential information floating across to CdM and TVI.

In the legual summary, the prosecutor did say that there was a greater likelihood that she was dead rather than alive, but also stressed that there was no evidence to support either view. The context should also be borne in mind: the prosecutor was writing this a year later with still no trace of her and, sadly, not that many children are found alive after being missing for so long. But some do. Hence his later remark of the chance of her being alive at 50 / 50.

[Miss Taken Identity]

Well, here is the thing, I do not come here to 'cause distress' I come to discuss.

If anyone comes here to cause distress, they should question their motives. Of course all the supporters will argue any discussion is adding to distress. Nothing like losing someone you love dearly can ever be overshadowed in my experience,however, if you are involved in the loved ones loss, you may want to feel like the victim to distract from your part played.

The McCanns feel they have done enough PR to quietly move on with their new lives. IMO

[carlymichelle]

the thing is too the mcanns  cant  speak fluent portugese either can most  people  how can they  say the  book  distressed  them if  half the population cant read it??

[Alfred R Jones]

]How does this thread, which is about the distress caused to the McCann family (not just Kate and Gerry) by internet "doubters", demonstrate that Kate and Gerry are MORE distressed by people like you and Amaral, than they are about the fate of their child?  Is it not possible that "doubting" activites adds to the distress of losing a child, and can cause further distress to Madeleine's siblings and grandparents, etc?