Is the apportioning of blame a coping mechanism?

[Alfred R Jones]

On a more on-topic note - re: those on here who like to apportion blame on the McCanns for absolutely everything - I wonder if this is a coping mechanism for stuff that is going on in their own lives?  Just a thought...

[slartibartfast]

On a more on-topic note - re: those on here who like to apportion blame on the McCanns for absolutely everything - I wonder if this is a coping mechanism for stuff that is going on in their own lives?  Just a thought...

Well I suppose those who support may have abandoned their own kids in the past and need someone to tell them it was reasonable...


Or we could stop this pointless sniping.

[Alfred R Jones]

Well I suppose those who support may have abandoned their own kids in the past and need someone to tell them it was reasonable...


Or we could stop this pointless sniping.

It's all pointless and most of it is sniping.  Sooooo.....what next?

[slartibartfast]

It's all pointless and most of it is sniping.  Sooooo.....what next?

We could try discussing the facts in the case...

[Alfred R Jones]

We could try discussing the facts in the case...

Hmm...here is the barely literate opening post for this thread.

Let's discuss it shall we?

kate mccann did in her book  cast aspersions and suspicions on  anyone in pdl...mYbe madeleine was drugged during the day.....disgusting

[G-Unit]

I think apportioning blame is a natural human trait. It starts at quite a young age; 'It wasn't me it was him/her/the dog/the cat'. It was frowned upon when I was young, it was 'telling tales'. On the other hand it was a good to own up and take responsibility. A harsh lesson really. If it wasn't you you weren't supposed to reveal the culprit. If it was you, no blaming someone else - own up! So either way you were the one in trouble. All you had for comfort was your integrity.

In the McCann case the parents freely admitted that they left the children in an unlocked apartment, but also strove to downplay it. They were naive, they checked the children regularly, they weren't far away (just like being in the garden), it was 'within the bounds of responsible parenting', and, most interestingly, ''I know that what happened is not due to the fact of us leaving the children asleep. I know it happened under other circumstances."

Immediately after the disappearance the Portuguese authorities began to be blamed by the parents and others for various perceived shortcomings. They left the group all alone, they didn't close roads and airports, they didn't seal the apartment, they didn't collect forensics, they smoked (?) in the Police Station, they didn't offer refreshments, they drove too fast. They were ridiculed and given childish nicknames.

When the dogs were brought in from the UK they were labelled 'incredibly unreliable' and 'unscientific', with a case in the US being used as an example. Unfortunately the case was solved and the dogs were exonerated.

The SIO then wrote his book. He was blamed for hampering the search, libeling the children, and hurting the parents. Following a civil defamation trial most of the points weren't proved, except the one of harming the parents.

It seems the McCann parents did quite a lot of blaming, and those who support them do the same. Anyone who dares to point out that leaving children home alone isn't 'responsible', that the PJ carried out a huge task to the best of their ability, that police dogs are incredibly useful or that Amaral's book didn't hamper the search is attacked. They are accused of lacking empathy, telling lies, being stupid, and trolling.

It seems to me that the parents have blamed everyone for everything which has befallen them, and done their utmost to escape any blame themselves.  Perhaps it has helped them to cope, but they ran the risk of 'protesting too much' and it has resulted in people becoming interested, researching the case, and deciding that the parents aren't convincing.

[Mr Gray]

Well I suppose those who support may have abandoned their own kids in the past and need someone to tell them it was reasonable...


Or we could stop this pointless sniping.

as you have brought it up ...I left my children in similar circumstances 20 odd years ago ... I wouldn't do it now....
however I am sure there are millions of children who have been exposed to second hand cigarette smoke all their lives by their parents...these children have been harmed

[Alfred R Jones]

I think apportioning blame is a natural human trait. It starts at quite a young age; 'It wasn't me it was him/her/the dog/the cat'. It was frowned upon when I was young, it was 'telling tales'. On the other hand it was a good to own up and take responsibility. A harsh lesson really. If it wasn't you you weren't supposed to reveal the culprit. If it was you, no blaming someone else - own up! So either way you were the one in trouble. All you had for comfort was your integrity.

In the McCann case the parents freely admitted that they left the children in an unlocked apartment, but also strove to downplay it. They were naive, they checked the children regularly, they weren't far away (just like being in the garden), it was 'within the bounds of responsible parenting', and, most interestingly, ''I know that what happened is not due to the fact of us leaving the children asleep. I know it happened under other circumstances."

Immediately after the disappearance the Portuguese authorities began to be blamed by the parents and others for various perceived shortcomings. They left the group all alone, they didn't close roads and airports, they didn't seal the apartment, they didn't collect forensics, they smoked (?) in the Police Station, they didn't offer refreshments, they drove too fast. They were ridiculed and given childish nicknames.

When the dogs were brought in from the UK they were labelled 'incredibly unreliable' and 'unscientific', with a case in the US being used as an example. Unfortunately the case was solved and the dogs were exonerated.

The SIO then wrote his book. He was blamed for hampering the search, libeling the children, and hurting the parents. Following a civil defamation trial most of the points weren't proved, except the one of harming the parents.

It seems the McCann parents did quite a lot of blaming, and those who support them do the same. Anyone who dares to point out that leaving children home alone isn't 'responsible', that the PJ carried out a huge task to the best of their ability, that police dogs are incredibly useful or that Amaral's book didn't hamper the search is attacked. They are accused of lacking empathy, telling lies, being stupid, and trolling.

It seems to me that the parents have blamed everyone for everything which has befallen them, and done their utmost to escape any blame themselves.  Perhaps it has helped them to cope, but they ran the risk of 'protesting too much' and it has resulted in people becoming interested, researching the case, and deciding that the parents aren't convincing.

Yeah, the parents should have just shut up, publicly self-flagellated, begged the world for forgiveness and then quietly taken all the shit that was thrown at them and their family on the chin.  That would have been what you'd have done, eh G-Unit?

Puh-lease!!

[Mr Gray]

I think apportioning blame is a natural human trait. It starts at quite a young age; 'It wasn't me it was him/her/the dog/the cat'. It was frowned upon when I was young, it was 'telling tales'. On the other hand it was a good to own up and take responsibility. A harsh lesson really. If it wasn't you you weren't supposed to reveal the culprit. If it was you, no blaming someone else - own up! So either way you were the one in trouble. All you had for comfort was your integrity.

In the McCann case the parents freely admitted that they left the children in an unlocked apartment, but also strove to downplay it. They were naive, they checked the children regularly, they weren't far away (just like being in the garden), it was 'within the bounds of responsible parenting', and, most interestingly, ''I know that what happened is not due to the fact of us leaving the children asleep. I know it happened under other circumstances."

Immediately after the disappearance the Portuguese authorities began to be blamed by the parents and others for various perceived shortcomings. They left the group all alone, they didn't close roads and airports, they didn't seal the apartment, they didn't collect forensics, they smoked (?) in the Police Station, they didn't offer refreshments, they drove too fast. They were ridiculed and given childish nicknames.

When the dogs were brought in from the UK they were labelled 'incredibly unreliable' and 'unscientific', with a case in the US being used as an example. Unfortunately the case was solved and the dogs were exonerated.

The SIO then wrote his book. He was blamed for hampering the search, libeling the children, and hurting the parents. Following a civil defamation trial most of the points weren't proved, except the one of harming the parents.

It seems the McCann parents did quite a lot of blaming, and those who support them do the same. Anyone who dares to point out that leaving children home alone isn't 'responsible', that the PJ carried out a huge task to the best of their ability, that police dogs are incredibly useful or that Amaral's book didn't hamper the search is attacked. They are accused of lacking empathy, telling lies, being stupid, and trolling.

It seems to me that the parents have blamed everyone for everything which has befallen them, and done their utmost to escape any blame themselves.  Perhaps it has helped them to cope, but they ran the risk of 'protesting too much' and it has resulted in people becoming interested, researching the case, and deciding that the parents aren't convincing.

a totally subjective post highlighting your biased viewpoint

[Alfred R Jones]

The McCanns, it seems, should have
1)publicly apologised for the "neglect",
2) asked to be prosecuted for it, despite the fact that no neglect law had been broken in Portugal
3)stated publicly that they were solely responsible for Madeleine's fate, no one else was to blame
4)allowed the police to build a case against them without question or any murmur of dissent,
5) agreed that the dogs were infallible and therefore that their daughter was almost certainly dead,
6) answered all self-incriminating questions put to them,
7) Not complained about any shortcomings within the investigation (despite the fact that these had been remarked upon by other professionals and despite the fact that the investigation had turned on them as number one suspects)
8) allowed the bent ex-cop to profit from the case by libelling them from start to finish, without complaint
9) allowed the British media to libel and smear them, without complaint

Anything else?

[Mr Gray]

The McCanns, it seems, should have
1)publicly apologised for the "neglect",
2) asked to be prosecuted for it, despite the fact that no neglect law had been broken in Portugal
3)stated publicly that they were solely responsible for Madeleine's fate, no one else was to blame
4)allowed the police to build a case against them without question or any murmur of dissent,
5) agreed that the dogs were infallible and therefore that their daughter was almost certainly dead,
6) answered all self-incriminating questions put to them,
7) Not complained about any shortcomings within the investigation (despite the fact that these had been remarked upon by other professionals and despite the fact that the investigation had turned on them as number one suspects)
8) allowed the bent ex-cop to profit from the case by libelling them from start to finish, without complaint
9) allowed the British media to libel and smear them, without complaint

Anything else?

yes...they should come on this forum and answer question...any innocent person would it seems

[stephen25000]

.......and yet again we see the self flaggerating, poor me act by the mccann supporters on behalf of their heroes.

I must remember...

They did nothing wrong
They did nothing wrong
They did nothing wrong.......


Well if you repeat something enough times some people will believe it.

However, not if you have even a basic measure of common sense.

I wonder how many millions upon millions of people,  would never have 'done a mccann' even before 2007 ?

[Alfred R Jones]

yes...they should come on this forum and answer question...any innocent person would it seems

Of course they should.  They could then apologise to each "sceptic" personally for causing such discomfort and upset to them.

[stephen25000]

Of course they should.  They could then apologise to each "sceptic" personally for causing such discomfort and upset to them.

No, just Madeleine.

For exhibiting 'responsible parenting skills'.

[misty]

I think apportioning blame is a natural human trait. It starts at quite a young age; 'It wasn't me it was him/her/the dog/the cat'. It was frowned upon when I was young, it was 'telling tales'. On the other hand it was a good to own up and take responsibility. A harsh lesson really. If it wasn't you you weren't supposed to reveal the culprit. If it was you, no blaming someone else - own up! So either way you were the one in trouble. All you had for comfort was your integrity.

In the McCann case the parents freely admitted that they left the children in an unlocked apartment, but also strove to downplay it. They were naive, they checked the children regularly, they weren't far away (just like being in the garden), it was 'within the bounds of responsible parenting', and, most interestingly, ''I know that what happened is not due to the fact of us leaving the children asleep. I know it happened under other circumstances."

Immediately after the disappearance the Portuguese authorities began to be blamed by the parents and others for various perceived shortcomings. They left the group all alone, they didn't close roads and airports, they didn't seal the apartment, they didn't collect forensics, they smoked (?) in the Police Station, they didn't offer refreshments, they drove too fast. They were ridiculed and given childish nicknames.

When the dogs were brought in from the UK they were labelled 'incredibly unreliable' and 'unscientific', with a case in the US being used as an example. Unfortunately the case was solved and the dogs were exonerated.

The SIO then wrote his book. He was blamed for hampering the search, libeling the children, and hurting the parents. Following a civil defamation trial most of the points weren't proved, except the one of harming the parents.

It seems the McCann parents did quite a lot of blaming, and those who support them do the same. Anyone who dares to point out that leaving children home alone isn't 'responsible', that the PJ carried out a huge task to the best of their ability, that police dogs are incredibly useful or that Amaral's book didn't hamper the search is attacked. They are accused of lacking empathy, telling lies, being stupid, and trolling.

It seems to me that the parents have blamed everyone for everything which has befallen them, and done their utmost to escape any blame themselves.  Perhaps it has helped them to cope, but they ran the risk of 'protesting too much' and it has resulted in people becoming interested, researching the case, and deciding that the parents aren't convincing.

In the same vein, why do you think Amaral is unable to shoulder any part of the blame whatsoever for his own downfall?