Loving parents who have covered up the accidental death of a child

[Alfred R Jones]

Keep your hair on. So you think Caylee Anthony was murdered by her mother, oh ok. Many do, many dont.
Her parents testified it was a drowning incident. Her lawyer argued this. She got off on the murder charge.
Yes, they could all be lying, one to save her skin, the others to do the same for her. It remains an example as YOU don't know the truth. You can't pick and chose what examples you accept. The verdict of not guilty of murder at least suggests the jury believed it was an accident. Why it was covered up I have no idea....round and round the mulberry bush....

If the jury found that Casey Anthony, loving or seemingly loving parent covered up the tragic death of her child then fair enough you've given us an example, albeit one about as convincing as OJ Simpson being an example of a decent family man falsely accused of murder, but thanks anyway. 

[Miss Taken Identity]

Are you aware of the fact that they were originally charged with murder, and subsequently found guilty of manslaughter?  This case is not an example of seemingly loving parents covering up the death of a child, and that's not goalpost shifting that's just a fact.

exactly What point are you trying to make here Alfie? asking a vague question then getting replies and then not accepting them.  The Philpots claimed it was an accident and tried to cover it up by claiming Micks ex GF was the one who was to blame...

Now what you have is the parents who loved their children never harmed them- we tried to tie that down but couldn't decide what  love was in every scenario. Perhaps I could suggest that parents who tried to cover up a child/children's accidental death were negligent and scared and then saw an opportunity to make a fast buck-like the Philpots.  They claim it was an accident- as in they didn't mean for their children to die, and they claim they love their children. This meets your  THREAD QUESTION criteria. You never mentioned in your thread title if the parents were then charged with murder... which would tie in with what part did the parents play in the  accident for them to feel they had to cover it up.

[Brietta]

I don't think deaths are covered up for neglect charges and I doubt the police do too when spending 11 million. They could lie and say they found the child when they awoke the following morning. The child must have got up in the night and was found behind the sofa the following morning. An autopsy would confirm it was a tragic fall accident.

If I am reading your post correctly ... you are suggesting that all they had to do in respect of accidental death was 'find' Madeleine behind the couch in the morning after a good nights sleep.
Post mortem.
Then flight home with no worries.

Why therefore go to the trouble of hiding a body in a place which hasn't been found nine years down the line when almost the same remedy would have saved the bother of 'simulating' anything?

[mercury]

If the jury found that Casey Anthony, loving or seemingly loving parent covered up the tragic death of her child then fair enough you've given us an example, albeit one about as convincing as OJ Simpson being an example of a decent family man falsely accused of murder, but thanks anyway.

The jury were not asked this ergo your post is defunct...perhaps you can furnish us with examples of charges laid leading to court where the parents were accused of covering up a tragic accident


Oh and btw AJ it is NOT without the realms of possibility that abc happened because people can't find enough similar examples for you
not saying abc happened but you have no basis for asserting abc couldn't have happened


Life is stranger than fiction dear

[pathfinder73]

If I am reading your post correctly ... you are suggesting that all they had to do in respect of accidental death was 'find' Madeleine behind the couch in the morning after a good nights sleep.
Post mortem.
Then flight home with no worries.

Why therefore go to the trouble of hiding a body in a place which hasn't been found nine years down the line when almost the same remedy would have saved the bother of 'simulating' anything?

It wasn't an accident if they covered it up because no child no autopsy.

[Brietta]

It wasn't an accident if they covered it up because no child no autopsy.

The point is ... they covered nothing up ... they found her missing from her bed.

[mercury]

The point is ... they covered nothing up ... they found her missing from her bed.

were you there? If not, then it's just your opinion not a fact, though it could be

[Brietta]

were you there? If not, then it's just your opinion not a fact, though it could be

It is a fact that Madeleine was missing from her bed.  If she wasn't ... where exactly is she?

[mercury]

It is a fact that Madeleine was missing from her bed.  If she wasn't ... where exactly is she?

Yes It seems to be the only fact that's all

[Mr Gray]

Really?

Davel posted
"rubbish... a child may have loving parents but rebel and hate their parents because they refuse to let them do things the parents consider harmful...its easy to decide if parents are loving or not"

Easy for who? a 5 year old who is physically and mentally abused because her family believe she is a witch?
 a 7 year old who has had a brutal version of FGM performed by a old woman with a piece of glass?

I have quoted two real instances of children who believed their parents loved them and knew what was best for them... Two of the parents were doctors!  One was struck off by the GMC. His colleagues were shocked to the core because  he was a great guy and lovely person very popular...

 who are you talking about Davel?

again..you have misunderstood...it is gunit who says children are the judge,,,I have said they are not.....

It is a genetic fact that in general parents are loving and look after their children....we would be extinct if that was not the case

[slartibartfast]

again..you have misunderstood...it is gunit who says children are the judge,,,I have said they are not.....

It is a genetic fact that in general parents are loving and look after their children....we would be extinct if that was not the case

That makes it easier, we can widen our scope to "in general" parents.

[Mr Gray]

That makes it easier, we can widen our scope to "in general" parents.

once again you come in with an irrelevant comment to a discussion that has been taking place over the past 12 hours...read back and you will understand

[stephen25000]

Real parents who love their children, do not leave them in blatantly obvious vulnerable conditions.

Likewise, real parents who love their children, do not place their socializing over their children's welfare.

[Alfred R Jones]

exactly What point are you trying to make here Alfie? asking a vague question then getting replies and then not accepting them.  The Philpots claimed it was an accident and tried to cover it up by claiming Micks ex GF was the one who was to blame...

Now what you have is the parents who loved their children never harmed them- we tried to tie that down but couldn't decide what  love was in every scenario. Perhaps I could suggest that parents who tried to cover up a child/children's accidental death were negligent and scared and then saw an opportunity to make a fast buck-like the Philpots.  They claim it was an accident- as in they didn't mean for their children to die, and they claim they love their children. This meets your  THREAD QUESTION criteria. You never mentioned in your thread title if the parents were then charged with murder... which would tie in with what part did the parents play in the  accident for them to feel they had to cover it up.

Oh dear.  You obviously don't understand the difference between an accident and a deliberate act of arson.  Never mind.

[Alfred R Jones]

It wasn't an accident if they covered it up because no child no autopsy.

so your view is her parents killed her.