Author Topic: Netflix launches new 8-part documentary about the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.  (Read 196729 times)

0 Members and 17 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Mr Gray

What is unbelievable is that any parent would find it acceptable behaviour for anyone to be flippant about dogs who may have alerted to the death of their daughter’s death in their holiday apartment. Most parents would be horrified.

IMO, the mccanns have enough intelligence to be of the opinion that the dogs might not have alerted to cadaver odour in the apartment.
« Last Edit: June 02, 2019, 08:29:40 PM by John »

Offline Brietta

What is unbelievable is that any parent would find it acceptable behaviour for anyone to be flippant about dogs who may have alerted to the death of their daughter’s death in their holiday apartment. Most parents would be horrified.

The description used was "laconically" which does not mean flippant ... and given that Sir Clement Freud probably knew as much about dogs as you do ... at the time was a terribly prescient conclusion to have reached.

Not a single thing approaching flippancy or hilarity.  Nothing more or less than a statement of fact.
"All I'm going to say is that we've conducted a very serious investigation and there's no indication that Madeleine McCann's parents are connected to her disappearance. On the other hand, we have a lot of evidence pointing out that Christian killed her," Wolter told the "Friday at 9"....

Offline ShiningInLuz

Where does it say on your membership application to the forum that you are exempt from the protocol of exercising plain old good manners when addressing others.

If you think that passes as a cite for anything other than bizarre malice ... in my opinion the problem is yours , not mine ... I see no-one, least of all Kate and Gerry rolling about in mirth.

The paucity of using it as such is way beyond my understanding.  It illustrates only that there is no sceptic case if that is the best evidence there is in support.

Being pedantic about a cite is certainly one way of hanging onto the reputation for integrity this forum once enjoyed ... since it enables the baseness of assertions to be challenged ... and I think your opinion on that fails the test.  When read in context that is not a cite which supports the allegation made.

  You asked for the cite.  You got the cite.
« Last Edit: June 02, 2019, 11:51:07 PM by Brietta »
What's up, old man?

Offline Mr Gray

I was asked for a cite for what I had posted.

I provided a cite for what I had posted.

 (&^&

you didnt provide a cite for CF joking...his expression was described as laconic

Offline John

The full quote from Kate McCann's book...

At  9.50pm,  I  rang  Clement.  ‘Come  on  round,’  he said.  ‘It’ l  be  nice  to  see  you.  But  you’l  have  to forgive  my night-time  attire.’ We  found  Clement  watching  a  cookery programme,  dressed,  as  promised,  in  his  nightshirt. It  was  so  ordinary  and  comforting,  a  bit  like  going  to see  your  grandad  after  a  horrible  day  at  school.  He gave  me  one  of  his  looks  and  a  giant  glass  of brandy,  and  managed  to  get  a  smile  out  of  me  with his  greeting:  ‘So,  Kate,  which  of  the  devout  Catholic, alcoholic,  depressed,  nymphomaniac  parts  is correct?’ His  response  to  our  catalogue  of  horrors  was merely  to  raise  an  eyebrow.  Clement  had  this  way  of making  everything  seem  a  little  less  terrible.  When he  heard  about  the  dogs,  he  remarked  laconicaly, ‘So  what  are  they  going  to  do?  Put  them  on  the stand?  One  bark  for  yes,  two  for  no?’  He  was  right, of  course;  it  was  ridiculous. A couple  of  hours  later,  fortified  by  our  brandies  (it was  my  first-ever  taste  of  the  stuff),  some  useful snippets  of  advice  and  several  amusing  anecdotes, we  left  our  friend  feeling  quite  a  bit  better  than  we had  when we’d  arrived.  The  shock  of  that  day,  and  of what  we  were  now  facing,  on  top  of  the  trauma  of Madeleine’s  absence,  never  left  us  for  a  second,  but it  was  interludes  like  this  that  gave  us  just  enough strength  to  carry  on.
A malicious prosecution for a crime which never existed. An exposé of egregious malfeasance by public officials.
Indeed, the truth never changes with the passage of time.

Offline Mr Gray

The full quote from Kate McCann's book...

At  9.50pm,  I  rang  Clement.  ‘Come  on  round,’  he said.  ‘It’ l  be  nice  to  see  you.  But  you’l  have  to forgive  my night-time  attire.’ We  found  Clement  watching  a  cookery programme,  dressed,  as  promised,  in  his  nightshirt. It  was  so  ordinary  and  comforting,  a  bit  like  going  to see  your  grandad  after  a  horrible  day  at  school.  He gave  me  one  of  his  looks  and  a  giant  glass  of brandy,  and  managed  to  get  a  smile  out  of  me  with his  greeting:  ‘So,  Kate,  which  of  the  devout  Catholic, alcoholic,  depressed,  nymphomaniac  parts  is correct?’ His  response  to  our  catalogue  of  horrors  was merely  to  raise  an  eyebrow.  Clement  had  this  way  of making  everything  seem  a  little  less  terrible.  When he  heard  about  the  dogs,  he  remarked  laconicaly, ‘So  what  are  they  going  to  do?  Put  them  on  the stand?  One  bark  for  yes,  two  for  no?’  He  was  right, of  course;  it  was  ridiculous. A couple  of  hours  later,  fortified  by  our  brandies  (it was  my  first-ever  taste  of  the  stuff),  some  useful snippets  of  advice  and  several  amusing  anecdotes, we  left  our  friend  feeling  quite  a  bit  better  than  we had  when we’d  arrived.  The  shock  of  that  day,  and  of what  we  were  now  facing,  on  top  of  the  trauma  of Madeleine’s  absence,  never  left  us  for  a  second,  but it  was  interludes  like  this  that  gave  us  just  enough strength  to  carry  on.

Thanks John...no mention of joking confirmed

Offline Vertigo Swirl

you didnt provide a cite for CF joking...his expression was described as laconic
Quite.  Apparently the cite supports the assertion that the McCanns were “joking and laughing “.  I would describe the cite as pure dross.
"You can't reason with the unreasonable".

Offline Mr Gray

Quite.  Apparently the cite supports the assertion that the McCanns were “joking and laughing “.  I would describe the cite as pure dross.

comprehensively pure dross

Offline G-Unit

you didnt provide a cite for CF joking...his expression was described as laconic

Expression?

Read and abide by the forum rules.
Result = happy posting.
Ignore and break the rules
Result = edits, deletions and unhappiness
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=2.0

Offline Mr Gray


Offline faithlilly

The description used was "laconically" which does not mean flippant ... and given that Sir Clement Freud probably knew as much about dogs as you do ... at the time was a terribly prescient conclusion to have reached.

Not a single thing approaching flippancy or hilarity.  Nothing more or less than a statement of fact.

I’m afraid that is the most disingenuous comment  I have ever seen you post. Freud’s comment was flippant in the extreme and in awful taste when you consider that, even if the parents weren’t involved, the dog may have been alerting to the tragic demise of a 3 year old child.
Brietta posted on 10/04/2022 “But whether or not that is the reason behind the delay I am certain that Brueckner's trial is going to take place.”

Let’s count the months, shall we?

Offline faithlilly

The full quote from Kate McCann's book...

At  9.50pm,  I  rang  Clement.  ‘Come  on  round,’  he said.  ‘It’ l  be  nice  to  see  you.  But  you’l  have  to forgive  my night-time  attire.’ We  found  Clement  watching  a  cookery programme,  dressed,  as  promised,  in  his  nightshirt. It  was  so  ordinary  and  comforting,  a  bit  like  going  to see  your  grandad  after  a  horrible  day  at  school.  He gave  me  one  of  his  looks  and  a  giant  glass  of brandy,  and  managed  to  get  a  smile  out  of  me  with his  greeting:  ‘So,  Kate,  which  of  the  devout  Catholic, alcoholic,  depressed,  nymphomaniac  parts  is correct?’ His  response  to  our  catalogue  of  horrors  was merely  to  raise  an  eyebrow.  Clement  had  this  way  of making  everything  seem  a  little  less  terrible.  When he  heard  about  the  dogs,  he  remarked  laconicaly, ‘So  what  are  they  going  to  do?  Put  them  on  the stand?  One  bark  for  yes,  two  for  no?’  He  was  right, of  course;  it  was  ridiculous. A couple  of  hours  later,  fortified  by  our  brandies  (it was  my  first-ever  taste  of  the  stuff),  some  useful snippets  of  advice  and  several  amusing  anecdotes, we  left  our  friend  feeling  quite  a  bit  better  than  we had  when we’d  arrived.  The  shock  of  that  day,  and  of what  we  were  now  facing,  on  top  of  the  trauma  of Madeleine’s  absence,  never  left  us  for  a  second,  but it  was  interludes  like  this  that  gave  us  just  enough strength  to  carry  on.

Is it too pedantic to point out the Kate in that quote admitted to breaking judicial secrecy ?
Brietta posted on 10/04/2022 “But whether or not that is the reason behind the delay I am certain that Brueckner's trial is going to take place.”

Let’s count the months, shall we?

Offline Mr Gray

I’m afraid that is the most disingenuous comment  I have ever seen you post. Freud’s comment was flippant in the extreme and in awful taste when you consider that, even if the parents weren’t involved, the dog may have been alerting to the tragic demise of a 3 year old child.

if the parents were not involved the dog could not have been alerting to maddie...

Offline faithlilly

The mccanns have enough intelligence to know that IMO the dogs did not alert to cadaver odour in the apartmnet.

You forgot...unless they were involved.
« Last Edit: June 02, 2019, 08:08:19 PM by slartibartfast »
Brietta posted on 10/04/2022 “But whether or not that is the reason behind the delay I am certain that Brueckner's trial is going to take place.”

Let’s count the months, shall we?

Offline Mr Gray

You forgot...unless they were involved.

I havent forgot anything...i think suggesting they are involved is ridiculous...based on teh evidence