Author Topic: Is Kate McCann's book "Madeleine" a fair representation of the known facts?  (Read 15270 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Alfie

  • Guest
It was a misnomer nevertheless. It's only interesting if you want to read a 'poor me' book in my opinion. The list is long; beginning with Mrs Fenn and moving on to the GNR, the PJ, the interpreters, the media, the British police, the Portuguese and British governments, the Home Secretary; all are criticised to a greater or lesser extent.
LOL.  You seem to find it intensely interesting.  How many times a day do you refer to it?


Offline ShiningInLuz

It was a misnomer nevertheless. It's only interesting if you want to read a 'poor me' book in my opinion. The list is long; beginning with Mrs Fenn and moving on to the GNR, the PJ, the interpreters, the media, the British police, the Portuguese and British governments, the Home Secretary; all are criticised to a greater or lesser extent.
From memory, you have missed some out e.g. the Tapas receptionist who was naughty enough to write that note, left in plain view, that the T9 got a block booking so they could nip back and check on their kids from time to time.  The note that does not seem to appear in the PJ Files, though Kate claimed it does.
What's up, old man?

Alfie

  • Guest
You're child disappears while you're in a foreign country, you believe she's been abducted, the police stop actively looking for her after a week and decide that you covered up her death.  Fancy writing a "poor me" book.  What on earth have you got to complain about?  You should be glad the police bothered to look at all and thankful they didn't beat you to a pulp - you probably would have deserved it anyway, you disgusting child neglecter!

Offline Brietta

From memory, you have missed some out e.g. the Tapas receptionist who was naughty enough to write that note, left in plain view, that the T9 got a block booking so they could nip back and check on their kids from time to time.  The note that does not seem to appear in the PJ Files, though Kate claimed it does.

It is irrational to imply that a false claim would be made about the existence of a document in police files when the police are in possession of exactly the same information being quoted and would immediately know if a falsehood was being disseminated.
"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

It is irrational to imply that a false claim would be made about the existence of a document in police files when the police are in possession of exactly the same information being quoted and would immediately know if a falsehood was being disseminated.
And which police would care?

Does the PJ track and prosecute falsehoods in a UK book?

Has OG fed this claim into HOLMES 2, only for the system to spit back at them, "Hang on blokes, where is the entry to this note?"

Anyone claiming the note exists merely needs to provide the note, or at least the index entry to it.

Kate says it was upon getting professional translations of the PJ Files that she realised such a note existed.  So where is this note?
What's up, old man?

Alfie

  • Guest
And which police would care?

Does the PJ track and prosecute falsehoods in a UK book?

Has OG fed this claim into HOLMES 2, only for the system to spit back at them, "Hang on blokes, where is the entry to this note?"

Anyone claiming the note exists merely needs to provide the note, or at least the index entry to it.

Kate says it was upon getting professional translations of the PJ Files that she realised such a note existed.  So where is this note?
If you have have been a suspect in a criminal investigation why are you going to give the police ammunition to further their suspicions that you are being deceitful?

Offline John

My own view is that Kate had to write this book, the money being a secondary consideration at the time.  She had to put her innermost thoughts down on paper for the sake of her own sanity.
« Last Edit: October 11, 2016, 06:44:28 PM by John »
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.

stephen25000

  • Guest
You're child disappears while you're in a foreign country, you believe she's been abducted, the police stop actively looking for her after a week and decide that you covered up her death.  Fancy writing a "poor me" book.  What on earth have you got to complain about?  You should be glad the police bothered to look at all and thankful they didn't beat you to a pulp - you probably would have deserved it anyway, you disgusting child neglecter!


Saying she's been abducted is not the same as believing it to be true.

Offline slartibartfast

My own view is that Kate had to write this book, the money being a secondary consideration at the time.  She had to put her innermost thoughts down on paper for the sake of Cher own sanity.

A defence looking for a trial.
“Reasoning will never make a Man correct an ill Opinion, which by Reasoning he never acquired”.

Offline G-Unit

You're child disappears while you're in a foreign country, you believe she's been abducted, the police stop actively looking for her after a week and decide that you covered up her death.  Fancy writing a "poor me" book.  What on earth have you got to complain about?  You should be glad the police bothered to look at all and thankful they didn't beat you to a pulp - you probably would have deserved it anyway, you disgusting child neglecter!

Well that's the criticism of the PJ explained to yur satisfaction. Care to tackle the rest?

Mrs Fenn, the interpreters, the media, the British police, the Portuguese and British governments, the Home Secretary; all are criticised to a greater or lesser extent.
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

Alfie

  • Guest
Well that's the criticism of the PJ explained to yur satisfaction. Care to tackle the rest?

Mrs Fenn, the interpreters, the media, the British police, the Portuguese and British governments, the Home Secretary; all are criticised to a greater or lesser extent.
As I'm not Kate and didn't live through the experiences she did it's pointless asking ME to justify her opinions about all the above.  Perhaps it would satisfy YOU if I simply described her as a moany old cow who should have kept quiet and not bothered to express her opinions in print?  But then if she hadn't think of all the sport you'd have missed out on!

Offline Robittybob1

Although in saying that Brie, some memories do get blurred with the passage of time.
There is one interview where Gerry says he hasn't read Kate's diary.  I presume he read Kate's book before it was published, but he is recorded as disagreeing with Kate over how they first met.  Any recollection would have different facts in it.  Each person notices different things.  I was really impressed that Kate was able to recollect so much so I have no doubt it is factual from her point of view.  There was nothing in it that made me think she was lying.  Well only one bit for I had thought she had seen CuddleCat on a shelf to start with.  Maybe we'll never know, about that.
« Last Edit: October 08, 2016, 12:10:32 AM by Robittybob1 »
Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.

Offline Benice

Well that's the criticism of the PJ explained to yur satisfaction. Care to tackle the rest?

Mrs Fenn, the interpreters, the media, the British police, the Portuguese and British governments, the Home Secretary; all are criticised to a greater or lesser extent.

So what?  Isn't she entitled to have an opinion on people whom she meets and what happens to her in her life?  The rest of us do it all the time.   

However,  when it comes to the McCanns there are people who never stop doing it and will pore over every word they say to seek out stuff to criticise them about - no matter how petty it is.

It seems to me that some folk wholeheartedly approve of criticism as long as it's directed at the McCanns -  but appear to disapprove of their similar right to be critical of anything or anyone themselves - simply because they are the McCanns. 

More than a tad irrational and hypocritical IMO.

The notion that innocence prevails over guilt – when there is no evidence to the contrary – is what separates civilization from barbarism.    Unfortunately, there are remains of barbarism among us.    Until very recently, it headed the PJ in Portimão. I hope he was the last one.
                                               Henrique Monteiro, chief editor, Expresso, Portugal

Offline G-Unit

So what?  Isn't she entitled to have an opinion on people whom she meets and what happens to her in her life?  The rest of us do it all the time.   

However,  when it comes to the McCanns there are people who never stop doing it and will pore over every word they say to seek out stuff to criticise them about - no matter how petty it is.

It seems to me that some folk wholeheartedly approve of criticism as long as it's directed at the McCanns -  but appear to disapprove of their similar right to be critical of anything or anyone themselves - simply because they are the McCanns. 

More than a tad irrational and hypocritical IMO.

Even though Kate McCann must know there's no evidence of abduction and that other opinions exist, that isn't addressed in her book. Once more the abduction is presented as a fact when it is by no means proved. The only justification she offers is her own opinion.

The book then documents every injustice she and her husband were subjected to, as the parents of an abducted child. She may indeed believe her daughter was abducted but expecting everyone else to believe it just because she says so is unrealistic.

The book would have been more interesting in my opinion if she had explained some of the anomalies which have aroused suspicion. We know from the witness statements that the group decided to operate their own listening service before they arrived in PdL, so her repeated claims that she left her children alone because the resort felt safe can be questioned. As can her claims that she never doubted the wisdom of leaving the patio door open; her friends testified that she did.



 

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

Alfie

  • Guest
Even though Kate McCann must know there's no evidence of abduction and that other opinions exist, that isn't addressed in her book. Once more the abduction is presented as a fact when it is by no means proved. The only justification she offers is her own opinion.

The book then documents every injustice she and her husband were subjected to, as the parents of an abducted child. She may indeed believe her daughter was abducted but expecting everyone else to believe it just because she says so is unrealistic.

The book would have been more interesting in my opinion if she had explained some of the anomalies which have aroused suspicion. We know from the witness statements that the group decided to operate their own listening service before they arrived in PdL, so her repeated claims that she left her children alone because the resort felt safe can be questioned. As can her claims that she never doubted the wisdom of leaving the patio door open; her friends testified that she did.
Then you would have accused her of trying to justify her actions and making lame excuses.  Don't even try to deny it.