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

[Brietta]

Some useful info here=

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

Thanks Anna, I knew I had read it somewhere.  An absolutely brilliant post from an excellent poster.  There is so much of interest already on our forum that we should really spend a lot more time going through past posts.

I think the right to have access to public documents is enshrined in the Portuguese Constitution; and with rights comes responsibility which was sadly lacking in this case.
I don't know if I am alone in finding the release of people's personal information shocking, but I think it is one of the most unsavoury aspects of the case.

[Brietta]

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?

Thanks is due to Anna for saving the day.

However I am not a jurist and know little of British law as it is applied to the various countries which make up our nation, let alone be capable of citing Portuguese law chapter and verse.

This is surely a discussion forum where one can make a statement which doesn't necessarily have to include studying for a PhD in International Law before hitting a keyboard.

Perhaps we should be grateful that we have both learned something from our own forum tonight.

[Anna]

Old News, but an idea of Kates thoughts about the children a while ago................


Madeleine McCann News: Mother Kate Reveals Internet Abuse As She Prepares To Run Virgin London Marathon
Huffington Post UK | By Sara C Nelson

Posted: 18/04/2013 13:31 BST Updated: 18/04/2013 13:39 BST

Kate McCann has revealed she has been the target of internet trolls as she prepares to take part in Sunday’s London Marathon.
The 45-year-old, who will run to raise funds for the charity Missing People, appeared on ITV’s Daybreak on Thursday.
She said: "We [her and husband Gerry] have obviously had a lot of abuse over the last six years, so in some ways it's nothing new. I think we tend to get a little bit blasé, which is wrong because you shouldn't do because it's bad.
Kate McCann appearing on Thursday's ITV Daybreak
"It is internet abuse and we both feel really strongly that more should be done about internet abuse. People wouldn't get away with behaving like that in the street and yet they feel like they can hide behind a computer at home."
Kate, whose daughter Madeleine vanished from a holiday resort in Praia da Luz, Portugal in 2007, added that she believes more needs to be done to tackle online abuse.
She continued: "We do have children. Even sometimes when I do think they're cowards and I'm not even going to go there, then I think about my children and I think it's not right that they should come across stuff like that as well."
While Kate did not specify the type of abuse she had been receiving, she may well be reassured to know convictions for internet abuse have more than doubled in the space of five years alongside the enormous growth in popularity of social media sites.
Madeleine McCann has been missing since 2007
Official figures show the number of people found guilty under section 127 of the Communications Act 2003 has grown each year from 498 in 2007 to 1,286 in 2011.
Kate, who is also mother to eight-year-old twins Sean and Amelie, also revealed she plans to go ahead with the race despite some recent health issues.
She explained: "It's been quite a slog and I think anybody who attempts a marathon knows there's a lot of training involved.
“And it's gone well really until the last five weeks. I've got a couple of problems, I've had a recurrent Achilles tendon problems…and I’ve also got a problem with the joint in my left foot."

Earlier this week the mother-of-three revealed Speaking to the Telegraph, she said: ““I think I could probably forgive Madeleine’s abductor whatever the circumstances… I can’t change anything and I don’t want to be eaten up by hatred and bitterness.”

She added: “There are moments when you despair, but they are infrequent now. As someone said: It’s not that your burden gets any lighter. It’s just that your legs get stronger. That really sums it up.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/04/18/madeleine-mccann-news-mother-kate-internet-abuse-virgin-london-marathon_n_3108175.html

[G-Unit]

Thanks is due to Anna for saving the day.

However I am not a jurist and know little of British law as it is applied to the various countries which make up our nation, let alone be capable of citing Portuguese law chapter and verse.

This is surely a discussion forum where one can make a statement which doesn't necessarily have to include studying for a PhD in International Law before hitting a keyboard.

Perhaps we should be grateful that we have both learned something from our own forum tonight.

Yes, thank you Anna! Sorry to put you on the spot Brietta. I don't expect anyone to be an expert in anything; I'm not. Stating an opinion on a discussion forum is fine. When discussing the recent meeting in Portugal we all discussed it without reference to facts because we had none. We gave our opinions and we all knew they were just opinions. You may have noticed I disagreed with Shining's statement that the Portugese were not leading the investigation. I knew that was wrong and I provided a reference to the Met police site accordingly. 

Saying that the PJ files were put onto the internet in breach of Portugese law isn't an opinion, it can be verified. In such cases I am likely to ask where the fact has come from. You don't need to answer, but then I don't have to accept it as a fact.

[G-Unit]

Old News, but an idea of Kates thoughts about the children a while ago................


Madeleine McCann News: Mother Kate Reveals Internet Abuse As She Prepares To Run Virgin London Marathon
Huffington Post UK | By Sara C Nelson

Posted: 18/04/2013 13:31 BST Updated: 18/04/2013 13:39 BST

Kate McCann has revealed she has been the target of internet trolls as she prepares to take part in Sunday’s London Marathon.
The 45-year-old, who will run to raise funds for the charity Missing People, appeared on ITV’s Daybreak on Thursday.
She said: "We [her and husband Gerry] have obviously had a lot of abuse over the last six years, so in some ways it's nothing new. I think we tend to get a little bit blasé, which is wrong because you shouldn't do because it's bad.
Kate McCann appearing on Thursday's ITV Daybreak
"It is internet abuse and we both feel really strongly that more should be done about internet abuse. People wouldn't get away with behaving like that in the street and yet they feel like they can hide behind a computer at home."
Kate, whose daughter Madeleine vanished from a holiday resort in Praia da Luz, Portugal in 2007, added that she believes more needs to be done to tackle online abuse.
She continued: "We do have children. Even sometimes when I do think they're cowards and I'm not even going to go there, then I think about my children and I think it's not right that they should come across stuff like that as well."
While Kate did not specify the type of abuse she had been receiving, she may well be reassured to know convictions for internet abuse have more than doubled in the space of five years alongside the enormous growth in popularity of social media sites.
Madeleine McCann has been missing since 2007
Official figures show the number of people found guilty under section 127 of the Communications Act 2003 has grown each year from 498 in 2007 to 1,286 in 2011.
Kate, who is also mother to eight-year-old twins Sean and Amelie, also revealed she plans to go ahead with the race despite some recent health issues.
She explained: "It's been quite a slog and I think anybody who attempts a marathon knows there's a lot of training involved.
“And it's gone well really until the last five weeks. I've got a couple of problems, I've had a recurrent Achilles tendon problems…and I’ve also got a problem with the joint in my left foot."

Earlier this week the mother-of-three revealed Speaking to the Telegraph, she said: ““I think I could probably forgive Madeleine’s abductor whatever the circumstances… I can’t change anything and I don’t want to be eaten up by hatred and bitterness.”

She added: “There are moments when you despair, but they are infrequent now. As someone said: It’s not that your burden gets any lighter. It’s just that your legs get stronger. That really sums it up.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/04/18/madeleine-mccann-news-mother-kate-internet-abuse-virgin-london-marathon_n_3108175.html

Without a definition of abuse I don't know what she means. If people are attacking her personally that's bad. I've seen some posts, particularly on Twitter which attack the McCanns and their supporters personally. I have also seen tweets which attack personally both those who doubt the McCanns' account of the case and the Portugese police. If people are doubting their account of the happenings of 3rd May 2007 they are doing what the PJ did. Was that abuse or a reasonable conclusion based on the evidence? That is the question..........

[Wonderfulspam]

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.

Can't see the problem with releasing the case files myself, considering the fact that the McCanns are 100% innocent, neither persons of interest or suspects & there being not a shred of evidence against them since they had absolutely no involvement whatsoever in Madeleine's disappearance.

Infact, releasing the case files is in Madeleine's best interests.

The innocent abducted child who was taken in a criminal act by a stranger has a better chance of being found if more people are analysing the files....

'Often police do say the name is in the files, it was always there, but you just need other bits of information to come in to highlight the name'

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRQQWmpiO3s&t=207

(It was Smithman....... and it's obvious who he was)

[Lace]

Of course it adds to the distress of the McCann family,   Kate Gerry the twins the Grandparents the Aunts and Uncles all of them.

Never have I seen a family abused,  threatened, stalked humiliated in the public eye as the McCann's.  No other parents of a missing child has had this much thrown at them and I think it is utterly disgusting.

[G-Unit]

Can't see the problem with releasing the case files myself, considering the fact that the McCanns are 100% innocent, neither persons of interest or suspects & there being not a shred of evidence against them since they had absolutely no involvement whatsoever in Madeleine's disappearance.

Infact, releasing the case files is in Madeleine's best interests.

The innocent abducted child who was taken in a criminal act by a stranger has a better chance of being found if more people are analysing the files....

'Often police do say the name is in the files, it was always there, but you just need other bits of information to come in to highlight the name'

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRQQWmpiO3s&t=207

(It was Smithman....... and it's obvious who he was)

I agree. Some people however, have cast doubt on the provenance of the files. If you follow Anna's link there is a long series of posts suggesting tha a dastardly character who was a friend of Goncalo Amaral illegally released the files and may have tampered with them.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=3835.msg144149#msg144149

I can't find any reference by the poster to any source which confirms his/her allegations so I have to assume there is none and that the allegations about the files are the poster's opinion only.

Joana Morais is quoted as exposing the dastardly person, as indeed she did. She also said;

The rogatory interviews done with the Tapas 7 in the UK, in April 2008, are legitimate. The DVD process is authentic. The book written by the former coordinator to the case is based on facts pertaining to the investigation - it is there that we should look for the Truth.
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id71.html

@Lace

The thread is about 'doubt' not abuse.

[Mr Gray]

I agree. Some people however, have cast doubt on the provenance of the files. If you follow Anna's link there is a long series of posts suggesting tha a dastardly character who was a friend of Goncalo Amaral illegally released the files and may have tampered with them.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=3835.msg144149#msg144149

I can't find any reference by the poster to any source which confirms his/her allegations so I have to assume there is none and that the allegations about the files are the poster's opinion only.

Joana Morais is quoted as exposing the dastardly person, as indeed she did. She also said;

The rogatory interviews done with the Tapas 7 in the UK, in April 2008, are legitimate. The DVD process is authentic. The book written by the former coordinator to the case is based on facts pertaining to the investigation - it is there that we should look for the Truth.
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id71.html

@Lace

The thread is about 'doubt' not abuse.

I agree...so is calling the mccanns liars.. is accusing them of perjury and fraud......doubt or abuse

[G-Unit]

I agree...so is calling the mccanns liars.. is accusing them of perjury and fraud......doubt or abuse

Doubt;
A feeling of uncertainty or lack of conviction:
some doubt has been cast upon the authenticity of this account

Abuse;
Speak to (someone) in an insulting and offensive way:
the referee was abused by players from both teams
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/abuse

[Alfred R Jones]

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.

So G-Unit, in what sort of venue would you be happy to express your doubts about the McCanns to their nearest and dearest?  In the queue at the supermarket perhaps?  I see that "good manners would prevent me (ie you) from raising the subject at all", apart that is from on the internet where your manners take a back seat to your "doubts" which you air very publicly and permanently for anyone in the world to see, including perhaps the family of Madeleine McCann.  What a strange double standard. 

What happened to Madeleine McCann isn't really my business, though I am interested to know.  I don't however make it my business to point fingers at those I think may be guilty, or to cast aspersions on the honesty of those involved in the case.  I do not like seeing people who I perceive to be victims of crime further victimised by internet "doubters" ("bullies" is a better word in my view) and that is why I have challenged such behaviour when I have encountered it.  I don't limit my interest to the McCann case in that respect either.  I am certainly not labouring under any misapprehension that anything I say or do is given the thumbs up by the McCanns themselves, but nor do I believe that my actions cause them distress.  If I were to discover that in fact I was wrong and that my actions WERE a source of distress to the family of Madeleine McCann then I would stop straight away.  "Doubters" already KNOW that their actions cause the McCann family distress but they continue anyway.  What does that tell you about these people?

[carlymichelle]

So G-Unit, in what sort of venue would you be happy to express your doubts about the McCanns to their nearest and dearest?  In the queue at the supermarket perhaps?  I see that "good manners would prevent me (ie you) from raising the subject at all", apart that is from on the internet where your manners take a back seat to your "doubts" which you air very publicly and permanently for anyone in the world to see, including perhaps the family of Madeleine McCann.  What a strange double standard. 

What happened to Madeleine McCann isn't really my business, though I am interested to know.  I don't however make it my business to point fingers at those I think may be guilty, or to cast aspersions on the honesty of those involved in the case.  I do not like seeing people who I perceive to be victims of crime further victimised by internet "doubters" ("bullies" is a better word in my view) and that is why I have challenged such behaviour when I have encountered it.  I don't limit my interest to the McCann case in that respect either.  I am certainly not labouring under any misapprehension that anything I say or do is given the thumbs up by the McCanns themselves, but nor do I believe that my actions cause them distress.  If I were to discover that in fact I was wrong and that my actions WERE a source of distress to the family of Madeleine McCann then I would stop straight away.  "Doubters" already KNOW that their actions cause the McCann family distress but they continue anyway.  What does that tell you about these people?

that they are not sheep and were taught to think for themselves??

[Alfred R Jones]

Doubt;
A feeling of uncertainty or lack of conviction:
some doubt has been cast upon the authenticity of this account

Abuse;
Speak to (someone) in an insulting and offensive way:
the referee was abused by players from both teams
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/abuse

Yes - doubt is a feeling, expressing your doubt in words day in day out over the course of many years strays very far into the realms of abuse IMO. 
For example if I were to write "G-Unit, I doubt that you are a very honest or decent person, and I think you know where the body is hidden" every day on this forum (may be several times a day) for nearly 8 years, would that just be l'il ol' me doubting, or would you feel under attack?

[Alfred R Jones]

that they are not sheep and were taught to think for themselves??

So, causing distress to the family of a missing child is a price worth paying for demonstrating (what you perceive to be) your independence of thought, is it?

[faithlilly]

Yes - doubt is a feeling, expressing your doubt in words day in day out over the course of many years strays very far into the realms of abuse IMO. 
For example if I were to write "G-Unit, I doubt that you are a very honest or decent person, and I think you know where the body is hidden" every day on this forum (may be several times a day) for nearly 8 years, would that just be l'il ol' me doubting, or would you feel under attack?

I think I would stop reading the forum. Simple.