What McCann spokesman Clarence Mitchell really thinks happened to Madeleine

[Crimson Dynamo]

https://www.missingpeople.org.uk/images/profile_picture/kate-thumbnail.jpg

When Clarence Mitchell picked up the phone at work one morning,
he expected yet another routine conversation.

But it was a phone call that plucked him from the mundane life of a civil service job
and dropped him right in the heart of one of the biggest missing children’s cases the
world has ever seen.

An ex BBC reporter, Mitchell was by then working in a government-led arm on media monitoring,
but had asked ex-colleagues to keep him in mind for any big stories that broke. “I thought it
might be something like bird flu, or foot and mouth. A general crisis that flares up from time
to time,” explains Mitchell.

But this was May 2007, and a three-year-old Madeleine McCann had just been snatched from her
hotel room in Praia du Luz, Portugal, taken from her bed while her parents dined in a nearby restaurant.

“The ambassador [to Portugal] had sent a couple of press officers down there, but they were overwhelmed
by the media response. He asked for some extra help from London,” Mitchell recalls.

“I was sent out and told it would just be a fortnight or so." But almost 12 years on, Mitchell is still
helping the family. Fascination with Madeleine's case has never abated - a new Netflix series, The Disappearance
of Madeleine McCann, was released two weeks ago - and Mitchell has been handling Gerry and Kate's media dealings ever since.

“Some of the coverage had been very negative, and so I thought this was a chance to help them," the 57-year-old says.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/content/dam/family/2019/03/25/126846970_PA_Missing-Madeleine-McCann-1_trans_NvBQzQNjv4BqX9bjHiwLnzqli-gJ5VBMRGCqQ3gaCGA2nla6HP63uTw.jpg?imwidth=700


“We have a good working relationship. Friendly but professional," he adds.
"We do not socialise, it is not necessarily appropriate, but the media coverage
is still pretty intrusive and they see me as a part of dealing with it."

Mitchell had to consider the impact that taking on such a case would have on him -
his own children were 10, eight and one at the time. “I could not help but think
of my kids when I was at the height of it... I was away from home a lot of the time as well," he recalls.

“That said, I treated it as a job. Although it was upsetting, and I could see the pain
it was causing the family, I could not afford to get emotionally attached to the situation.
I just had to look at the set of facts in front of me, and treat it as dispassionately as possible."

He admits that it was "upsetting," but adds that, "without being callous, I had to keep the
actual emotion to one side. Not wanting to sound cold-hearted, but I do not think it has
affected me particularly badly. I tried to be as impartial as possible, and still try to this day.”

Over the years, the McCanns have faced a great deal of criticism over their parenting, and
perceived role in Madeleine’s disappearance. “A lot of it is misinformed, misguided and based
purely on assumptions or lack of knowledge," Mitchell says. Mostly, though, it is "prejudice.
People deciding that they don’t like the McCanns.”

https://cdn.images.express.co.uk/img/dynamic/1/590x/m-393008.jpg

Mitchell estimates that "thousands" of people have told him they have seen the little girl in a dream -
including a lot of psychics - while "one of the most ridiculous conspiracy theories I have heard was
that Madeleine was born as the result of a government cloning project.

“People also assumed the worst. That [the McCanns] were getting drunk, that they were having fun and
that they did not care about their children."

Further criticism of Gerry and Kate has labelled them "neglectful. There is even those who say that
the parents know what happened. They don’t. It is just not true. But try explaining that in the noise
of social media and general coverage.”

The McCanns' restrained emotional response to the cameras in the immediate aftermath of Madeleine's
disappearance provoked questions: how could they be so contained after something so terrible had happened?

“One of the reasons they were so controlled was because they were told very early on that often,
in the case of paedophilic kidnaps, the perpetrators watch media coverage and enjoy seeing the distress
that they have caused," Mitchell explains.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/content/dam/news/2019/03/15/TELEMMGLPICT000191490639_trans_NvBQzQNjv4BqNJjoeBT 78QIaYdkJdEY4CnGTJFJS74MYhNY6w3GNbO8.jpeg?imwidth= 500



“So, the police told them not to cry. Not to show any over-emotion. Kate and Gerry, both doctors and both logical, were not going to let that b------ have that satisfaction and so were very rigid.

He understands, though, that “for someone who does not know that, they might think it looks a bit suspicious. It is almost like the public were expecting the parents to react in a certain way.”

Things were worsened still by what he calls "a spin-cycle of madness." The papers were full of "McCann fury", he remembers; "the tabloids exaggerated and distorted the information." He is also critical of the Portuguese authorities, as "there would be certain bits of information that could have only come from interviews with the Portuguese police, who wouldn't then confirm anything due to Portuguese laws prohibiting the discussion of legal cases.”

Since the McCanns entered the public eye in 2007, they have received mountains of abuse; Mitchell, too, has had his fair share of online trolls.

“I get slammed online all the time for defending them," he says, adding that while he ignores it as best he can, "it is hurtful and it is unnecessary. The McCanns ignore the online negativity and so do I. We only act if there are specific, actionable threats which are always reported to the police.”

Certain tabloids have cashed in on public fascination with Madeleine, Mitchell believes, as "every time they put [her] on the front page, circulation would go up" - whether there really were new developments in her case or not. Front page apologies from a number of red tops followed, while "substantial damages" were paid.


https://secure.i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/02609/mccann_2609907b.jpg



A major source of ill feeling towards the McCanns has been the considerable funding the case has received. The Find Madeleine Fund was established in 2007, made up of public donations as well as settlement money from the Express newspaper group, and proceeds from Kate McCann's book.

“The family asked for help in finding their daughter, as anybody would, and the Government chose to support them," Mitchell says, "I do agree though, what do you say to the parent of another missing child? The mother of Ben Needham, for example, has occasionally been upset that the McCanns' case gets so much coverage.”

It is our digital age, however, that Mitchell believes has made all the difference.

“Madeleine has been, arguably, the most high-profile missing child case in the internet era. It was not a decision of our making.”

Nowadays, he does little work with the McCanns, and remains uncertain over Madeleine's fate. “I asked the British authorities what they think happened and if there was any family involvement, and they assured me it was just a rare case of stranger abduction.

“It’s very rare, but it can happen." A sexual motive, he says, is an "obvious" possibility. Kate and Gerry remain hopeful that, as per "other cases, where a missing child has been found alive after many years," there remains hope: that, coupled with "the complete absence of any evidence that Madeleine has been physically harmed," gives them the sense that their eldest daughter may well still be alive.

Though Mitchell hopes the mystery "could all end on one phone call tomorrow, so far, it hasn’t.

“A child was taken to order from that room.”


https://www.telegraph.co.uk/family/parenting/mccann-spokesman-clarence-mitchell-really-thinks-happened-madeleine/

[Niamh.]

Clarence Mitchell is their PR Spokesman......... I think I'll take his thoughts with a pinch of salt thanks :laugh:

[Crimson Dynamo]

Though Mitchell hopes the mystery "could all end on one phone call tomorrow, so far, it hasn’t.

“A child was taken to order from that room.”

[thesheriff443]

Though Mitchell hopes the mystery "could all end on one phone call tomorrow, so far, it hasn’t.

“A child was taken to order from that room.”

But my old fruit, how do you explaine, the dogs finding traces of a dead person in the room and hire care.

[Crimson Dynamo]

But my old fruit, how do you explaine, the dogs finding traces of a dead person in the room and hire care.

:think:

yes I wonder how Scotland Yard missed that but people who watched some random youtube video spotted it?


Its a mystery :shrug:

[Elliot]

Clarence Mitchell is their PR Spokesman......... I think I'll take his thoughts with a pinch of salt thanks :laugh:

Lmao yeah

[Crimson Dynamo]

Over the years, the McCanns have faced a great deal of criticism over their parenting, and
perceived role in Madeleine’s disappearance. “A lot of it is misinformed, misguided and based
purely on assumptions or lack of knowledge," Mitchell says. Mostly, though, it is "prejudice.
People deciding that they don’t like the McCanns.”

:rolleyes:

[thesheriff443]

Over the years, the McCanns have faced a great deal of criticism over their parenting, and
perceived role in Madeleine’s disappearance. “A lot of it is misinformed, misguided and based
purely on assumptions or lack of knowledge," Mitchell says. Mostly, though, it is "prejudice.
People deciding that they don’t like the McCanns.”

:rolleyes:

But those two have never showed an ounce of emotion!

Seen people get more choked up about losing hamster than they have about that poor girl.

[Crimson Dynamo]

But those two have never showed an ounce of emotion!

Seen people get more choked up about losing hamster than they have about that poor girl.

"The McCanns' restrained emotional response to the cameras in the immediate aftermath of Madeleine's
disappearance provoked questions: how could they be so contained after something so terrible had happened?

“One of the reasons they were so controlled was because they were told very early on that often,
in the case of paedophilic kidnaps, the perpetrators watch media coverage and enjoy seeing the distress
that they have caused," Mitchell explains."

[thesheriff443]

"The McCanns' restrained emotional response to the cameras in the immediate aftermath of Madeleine's
disappearance provoked questions: how could they be so contained after something so terrible had happened?

“One of the reasons they were so controlled was because they were told very early on that often,
in the case of paedophilic kidnaps, the perpetrators watch media coverage and enjoy seeing the distress
that they have caused," Mitchell explains."

Come on lt, it’s been a long time since that night.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Come on lt, it’s been a long time since that night.

look at the anguish here

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DSUgr3CUMAAZIf4.jpg

[Niamh.]

Over the years, the McCanns have faced a great deal of criticism over their parenting, and
perceived role in Madeleine’s disappearance. “A lot of it is misinformed, misguided and based
purely on assumptions or lack of knowledge," Mitchell says. Mostly, though, it is "prejudice.
People deciding that they don’t like the McCanns.”

:rolleyes:

Oh so they never let the kids (I say kids but babies is more accurate) alone in an unlocked apartment and went out drinking then?

[Crimson Dynamo]

Oh so they never let the kids (I say kids but babies is more accurate) alone in an unlocked apartment and went out drinking then?

if they had not gone to dinner it would have been next day in the supermarket, or on the beach, they never stood a chance if dedicated people wanted to steal a child.

yTlLWfnD568

[AnnieK]

if they had not gone to dinner it would have been next day in the supermarket, or on the beach, they never stood a chance if dedicated people wanted to steal a child.

yTlLWfnD568

If they had not gone to dinner and left the children alone, they would have not opened themselves up to the condemnation from good parents who would never leave their children unattended in a foreign country, at night, whilst they went out on the piss. If they had not gone to dinner, the other attempts could have been thwarted if the children were properly supervised as they should have been at that age.

[Twosugars]

LT, it's morally questionable to perv over a woman in distress you know :nono:

[Kazanne]

Over the years, the McCanns have faced a great deal of criticism over their parenting, and
perceived role in Madeleine’s disappearance. “A lot of it is misinformed, misguided and based
purely on assumptions or lack of knowledge," Mitchell says. Mostly, though, it is "prejudice.
People deciding that they don’t like the McCanns.”

:rolleyes:

Welcome to the world of guilty even if innocent.!!:hehe:

[user104658]

I'm not buying it LT. I'm agnostic on the parent's involvement at this point BUT, if she was kidnapped to order, it's because someone knew that there were children being left in apartments, regularly, at predictable times and the act was planned around that fact. There's a reason it happened after they had followed the same routine for several nights (people knew they'd be at the bar, and the kids would be alone) and there's a reason that the Tapas crew's story has changed repeatedly (they BLATANTLY were not checking every 20 minutes and most likely were leaving the kids alone for several hours, recklessly assuming they were safe).

I mean... you say it "would" have happened the next day at the beach or in a store... but realistically the chances of grabbing a child in public and getting away at all - let alone without someone seeing your face - are small at best. I'm sure it happens but it's a massive risk to take.

But you're looking to steal a little blonde child and someone has tipped you off that there's one sleeping in an unlocked apartment - unattended - every night, for hours at a time? You don't think that makes her an easy target? :think:


Fact is, there's no excuse for them leaving the kids like that and even they know it, which is why the Tapas folks have all agreed not to tell the truth about the timeframe. The idea that it is (or ever was) "normal for parents" or "normal for British parents" to leave toddlers unsupervised whilst out for dinner is utter nonsense.

Regardless of what happened I really wish they'd taken responsibility for that aspect. They didn't have to be hung, drawn and quartered but they'd probably have a lot MORE public sympathy if they had ever said "We were really reckless to leave her, that was a terrible mistake, PLEASE don't leave children alone like we did." ... but, they never have. The narrative has always been that that part of the story was all fine :umm2:. As has been pointed out - if it was Bob and Kelly from a council estate in Manchester leaving the kids at home and popping to the pub at the end of the road, and someone broke in and harmed them, they would be absolutely slaughtered in the media, by public opinion, and probably face legal consequences to boot.

[Crimson Dynamo]

If they had not gone to dinner and left the children alone, they would have not opened themselves up to the condemnation from good parents who would never leave their children unattended in a foreign country, at night, whilst they went out on the piss. If they had not gone to dinner, the other attempts could have been thwarted if the children were properly supervised as they should have been at that age.

judement by hindsight is just judgement with hindsight, all parents have left their child unattended enough for an abduction to take place. It can take 5 seconds to whip a child away. When i was wee all children were left outside shops in prams whilst their mums shopped inside.

[Denver]

They are as guilty as sin, they care more about money then Madeline

[user104658]

judement by hindsight is just judgement with hindsight, all parents have left their child unattended enough for an abduction to take place. It can take 5 seconds to whip a child away. When i was wee all children were left outside shops in prams whilst their mums shopped inside.

Again LT whilst that may be true you have to put it in historical context, and claiming that it was usual or normal to leave children alone in an apartment and go out for dinner 12 years ago is simply flat out false.

Also as I said above; an "opportunity snatch" is a RISK for any predator at best, whilst sneaking a child away when you know they're going to be unattended for several hours is far less of a risk. They weren't checking on them or were checking infrequently at best, witness statements from several other people at the resort confirm that they weren't observed to be checking every 20 minutes, ONLY the Tapas people claim it was that often, and if you're right and she was stolen to order it's because (excuse the crass terminology) she was "low hanging fruit" and someone had been watching and knew that.

[Niamh.]

judement by hindsight is just judgement with hindsight, all parents have left their child unattended enough for an abduction to take place. It can take 5 seconds to whip a child away. When i was wee all children were left outside shops in prams whilst their mums shopped inside.

Sorry but that's so ridiculous, you shouldn't need hindsight to know you don't leave babies alone in an unlocked (or locked) apartment we'll you go out on the piss. Give me a break

[Crimson Dynamo]

Again LT whilst that may be true you have to put it in historical context, and claiming that it was usual or normal to leave children alone in an apartment and go out for dinner 12 years ago is simply flat out false.

Also as I said above; an "opportunity snatch" is a RISK for any predator at best, whilst sneaking a child away when you know they're going to be unattended for several hours is far less of a risk. They weren't checking on them or were checking infrequently at best, witness statements from several other people at the resort confirm that they weren't observed to be checking every 20 minutes, ONLY the Tapas people claim it was that often, and if you're right and she was stolen to order it's because (excuse the crass terminology) she was "low hanging fruit" and someone had been watching and knew that.

perhaps but the fault lies firmly with the abductor or you end up blaming women for being raped for wearing tits out tops and getting drunk at night, or taking cabs home after a club etc

what they did was perfectly safe and millions do it

[Niamh.]

Again LT whilst that may be true you have to put it in historical context, and claiming that it was usual or normal to leave children alone in an apartment and go out for dinner 12 years ago is simply flat out false.

Also as I said above; an "opportunity snatch" is a RISK for any predator at best, whilst sneaking a child away when you know they're going to be unattended for several hours is far less of a risk. They weren't checking on them or were checking infrequently at best, witness statements from several other people at the resort confirm that they weren't observed to be checking every 20 minutes, ONLY the Tapas people claim it was that often, and if you're right and she was stolen to order it's because (excuse the crass terminology) she was "low hanging fruit" and someone had been watching and knew that.

Exactly. I watched a documentary one time where they actually interviewed thieves, as in house burglars. They always targeted the houses with the least security, no alarms, no dogs etc because guess what?? risk of being caught was significantly lowered

[Niamh.]

perhaps but the fault lies firmly with the abductor or you end up blaming women for being raped for wearing tits out tops and getting drunk at night, or taking cabs home after a club etc

what they did was perfectly safe and millions do it

No you don't LT, the parents at the very least are guilty of neglect/failing to protect their children. How on earth is that comparable to a girl wearing a low cut top?

[Crimson Dynamo]

Exactly. I watched a documentary one time where they actually interviewed thieves, as in house burglars. They always targeted the houses with the least security, no alarms, no dogs etc because guess what?? risk of being caught was significantly lowered

and you would blame your neighbour for being burgled for not having a dog?


:umm2:

[GoldHeart]

The mcCann's behaviour & actions from the beginning have been questionable and very bizarre.

I will never understand how parent's can leave their very young children alone in an apartment while on holiday in a foreign country as they go out for drinks with their friends :facepalm: .

If Madeline WAS kidnapped , the parent's were the ones that made it very easy to happen by abandoning their kids home alone :crazy:. But i don't think we'll ever find out what really happened.

[Niamh.]

and you would blame your neighbour for being burgled for not having a dog?


:umm2:

No LT but then again my neighbour isn't likely to be arrested for not looking after their house properly either

[Crimson Dynamo]

The mcCann's behaviour & actions from the beginning have been questionable and very bizarre.

I will never understand how parent's can leave their very young children alone in an apartment while on holiday in a foreign country as they go out for drinks with their friends :facepalm: .

If Madeline WAS kidnapped , the parent's were the ones that made it very easy to happen by abandoning their kids home alone :crazy:. But i don't think we'll ever find out what really happened.

they didnt

[Niamh.]

they didnt

They didn't make it easy? Oh LT

[user104658]

perhaps but the fault lies firmly with the abductor or you end up blaming women for being raped for wearing tits out tops and getting drunk at night, or taking cabs home after a club etc

what they did was perfectly safe and millions do it

The blame for the crime always lies with the perpetrator but no one is saying that if someone did take her, they should be let off "because it was easy" - they should face the full force of the law - whereas I don't think someone who has lost a child should face ANY consequences even if they have been reckless but it should still be acknowledged.

"Millions" certainly don't do it, I've never done it and would never dream of it and I literally don't personally know any parent who would. I know SOME people do it but I'd say the exact same about them; they're being reckless. It is NOT "perfectly safe" even if you take the risk of abduction out of the equation. What if there's a fire? Or any other emergency? Hell what if one of them simply wakes up scared from a nightmare and can't find their parents anywhere? It's just not OK :shrug:.

It's also not "victim blaming" comparable to sexual assault either. Parental responsibility is not comparable to individual responsibility, for a start, and also as above the risks of leaving a child alone go WAY beyond the risk of being attacked.

What you could compare it to, is a parent failing to put a seatbelt on their child and then that child dying in what would otherwise have been a non-fatal crash. Would you lambast them and call them scum? No, you'd still have sympathy for them as a devastated parent who has lost a child, but it DOESN'T change the fact that they ****ed up and that should be acknowledged. You wouldn't' say to others, "Hey you shouldn't bother with seatbelts because crashing is pretty rare anyway"... you'd say "Remember to buckle everyone up because look what happened to that poor kid". Surely.

[Denver]

They are clearly unfit to be around kids when they admitting neglecting them, how social services were not involved is beyond me

[Crimson Dynamo]

They are clearly unfit to be around kids when they admitting neglecting them, how social services were not involved is beyond me

how would they be involved?

[Denver]

how would they be involved?

Because they neglected their children

[Niamh.]

The blame for the crime always lies with the perpetrator but no one is saying that if someone did take her, they should be let off "because it was easy" - they should face the full force of the law - whereas I don't think someone who has lost a child should face ANY consequences even if they have been reckless but it should still be acknowledged.

"Millions" certainly don't do it, I've never done it and would never dream of it and I literally don't personally know any parent who would. I know SOME people do it but I'd say the exact same about them; they're being reckless. It is NOT "perfectly safe" even if you take the risk of abduction out of the equation. What if there's a fire? Or any other emergency? Hell what if one of them simply wakes up scared from a nightmare and can't find their parents anywhere? It's just not OK :shrug:.

It's also not "victim blaming" comparable to sexual assault either. Parental responsibility is not comparable to individual responsibility, for a start, and also as above the risks of leaving a child alone go WAY beyond the risk of being attacked.

What you could compare it to, is a parent failing to put a seatbelt on their child and then that child dying in what would otherwise have been a non-fatal crash. Would you lambast them and call them scum? No, you'd still have sympathy for them as a devastated parent who has lost a child, but it DOESN'T change the fact that they ****ed up and that should be acknowledged. You wouldn't' say to others, "Hey you shouldn't bother with seatbelts because crashing is pretty rare anyway"... you'd say "Remember to buckle everyone up because look what happened to that poor kid". Surely.

Exactly, my son used to wake up at night all the time up to when he was around 7ish, he would be terrified if he woke up and someone wasn't there for him. That's why I found it so weird that kate says that Maddie had woken the night before and told her that the twins were crying and where was she? I would be horrified to think my babies had woken up and cried but no one came, so that should have been her "light bulb hindsight" moment (as if a person really needed one..........)

[Crimson Dynamo]

The blame for the crime always lies with the perpetrator but no one is saying that if someone did take her, they should be let off "because it was easy" - they should face the full force of the law - whereas I don't think someone who has lost a child should face ANY consequences even if they have been reckless but it should still be acknowledged.

"Millions" certainly don't do it, I've never done it and would never dream of it and I literally don't personally know any parent who would. I know SOME people do it but I'd say the exact same about them; they're being reckless. It is NOT "perfectly safe" even if you take the risk of abduction out of the equation. What if there's a fire? Or any other emergency? Hell what if one of them simply wakes up scared from a nightmare and can't find their parents anywhere? It's just not OK :shrug:.

It's also not "victim blaming" comparable to sexual assault either. Parental responsibility is not comparable to individual responsibility, for a start, and also as above the risks of leaving a child alone go WAY beyond the risk of being attacked.

What you could compare it to, is a parent failing to put a seatbelt on their child and then that child dying in what would otherwise have been a non-fatal crash. Would you lambast them and call them scum? No, you'd still have sympathy for them as a devastated parent who has lost a child, but it DOESN'T change the fact that they ****ed up and that should be acknowledged. You wouldn't' say to others, "Hey you shouldn't bother with seatbelts because crashing is pretty rare anyway"... you'd say "Remember to buckle everyone up because look what happened to that poor kid". Surely.

what about letting your daughter drink at 16 and she chokes to death on vomit, what about letting her go to a concert at 17 with her pals and she takes a dodgy E - letting your 7 year old son go to the local park and he gets abducted on his way home?

That wee girl on the scottish island was in her bed and was not safe, the parents did not lock the house door - i have not heard much abuse about them?

to try and have a go at the parents after a child is abducted is gross, they decided what they has set up was safe and its their call. Maybe some parents think that the worst will always happen but some dont because it does not.

[GoldHeart]

I can't help but think if the mcCanns were a chavy working class couple living on the council estate ie like Karen Mathews type situation ,then their other kids would be taken off them by now and social services would of been involved :suspect: .

Whether they like to present themselves as middle class intelligent professional people with good jobs , it makes no difference as they still neglected their children . And i find their behaviour very weird throughout .

[AnnieK]

what about letting your daughter drink at 16 and she chokes to death on vomit, what about letting her go to a concert at 17 with her pals and she takes a dodgy E - letting your 7 year old son go to the local park and he gets abducted on his way home?

That wee girl on the scottish island was in her bed and was not safe, the parents did not lock the house door - i have not heard much abuse about them?

to try and have a go at the parents after a child is abducted is gross, they decided what they has set up was safe and its their call. Maybe some parents think that the worst will always happen but some dont because it does not.

It wasn't safe though obviously, people are entitled to comment

In this case, the worst did happen so people are entitled to comment.

[Crimson Dynamo]

It wasn't safe though obviously, people are entitled to comment

In this case, the worst did happen so people are entitled to comment.

not commenting on the fact that wee girl Alesha was abducted from an unlocked house?

[Niamh.]

not commenting on the fact that wee girl Alesha was abducted from an unlocked house?

She wasn't left there alone though was she?

[Crimson Dynamo]

She wasn't left there alone though was she?

yes alone in her room

[bots]

i think LT is obsessed with Kate, forget Madeline

[Niamh.]

yes alone in her room

:rolleyes:

[Niamh.]

i think LT is obsessed with Kate, forget Madeline

mmhhmm

[AnnieK]

not commenting on the fact that wee girl Alesha was abducted from an unlocked house?

Not commenting on the fact that had she not been left alone she may still be safe and well with her parents?

I don't know enough about that case to comment one way or another and even if they were negligent in any way, it still wouldn't excuse the McCann's for leaving 3 kids under 4 alone to go and socailise.

As for your previous comment that MILLIONS of parents do it, can you provide proof of that? I know of no parent who has left their kids, particularly on holiday, home alone (and I'm from Salford!)

[Niamh.]

Not commenting on the fact that had she not been left alone she may still be safe and well with her parents?

I don't know enough about that case to comment one way or another and even if they were negligent in any way, it still wouldn't excuse the McCann's for leaving 3 kids under 4 alone to go and socailise.

As for your previous comment that MILLIONS of parents do it, can you provide proof of that? I know of no parent who has left their kids, particularly on holiday, home alone (and I'm from Salford!)

She wasn't left alone, her dad and grandparents were in the house at the time

[GoldHeart]

Not commenting on the fact that had she not been left alone she may still be safe and well with her parents?

I don't know enough about that case to comment one way or another and even if they were negligent in any way, it still wouldn't excuse the McCann's for leaving 3 kids under 4 alone to go and socailise.

As for your previous comment that MILLIONS of parents do it, can you provide proof of that? I know of no parent who has left their kids, particularly on holiday, home alone (and I'm from Salford!)

This is what i can't get my head around ! , the children were 2 babies and Madeline was still pretty much a toddler ! :facepalm: . Who in their right mind leaves kids THIS YOUNG alone not only at home but while on holiday in a different environment!! . Anything can happen when they're left unsupervised.

Red flags are there , it's very worrying that these parent's had that mind set to go out drinking plus why not go somewhere child friendly and take the children with them?? .

I have never heard anyone think it's normal to leave children alone who are that SMALL. Even children aged 10 would still have some sort of care instead of being left totally on their own . But a 10 year old being left alone isn't the same as 3 small kids .

[AnnieK]

She wasn't left alone, her dad and grandparents were in the house at the time

No, he was asking me if I had no comment (on that Scottish case) and I was throwing it back to him asking if he had no comment that if the McCann's hadn't left Maddie there is every chance that she would still be safe and well.

[Niamh.]

No, he was asking me if I had no comment (on that Scottish case) and I was throwing it back to him asking if he had no comment that if the McCann's hadn't left Maddie there is every chance that she would still be safe and well.

oh my apologies. Just a stupid comparison he's trying to make

[AnnieK]

oh my apologies. Just a stupid comparison he's trying to make

I didn't make it clear - my fault

I want to see what proof he has of the MILLIONs of people leaving their kids alone, LT is normally such a stickler for facts and figures, I am sure he will have such proof at his finger tips

[Niamh.]

I didn't make it clear - my fault

I want to see what proof he has of the MILLIONs of people leaving their kids alone, LT is normally such a stickler for facts and figures, I am sure he will have such proof at his finger tips

Well, I've never come across it. The "norm" around anyone I know when taking kids on holiday is take them with you to eat, they just go to bed a bit later :shrug:

[AnnieK]

Well, I've never come across it. The "norm" around anyone I know when taking kids on holiday is take them with you to eat, they just go to bed a bit later :shrug:

Indeed....

[user104658]

what about letting your daughter drink at 16 and she chokes to death on vomit, what about letting her go to a concert at 17 with her pals and she takes a dodgy E - letting your 7 year old son go to the local park and he gets abducted on his way home?

There are necessary nominal risks involved in letting your children grow up and become more independent, just as there are necessary nominal risks in life. We have electrical appliances in our homes although there's a risk that they will start a fire; we have smoke detectors to minimize the risk that a fire will end in a death because a responsible adult will or should know what to do in the event of a fire.

Leaving a 3 year old (and two younger children) ALONE in an apartment on holiday is not a necessary nominal risk and the fact is that most people simply would not do it, despite your insistence otherwise. I can't figure out if you're so adamant that it's normal for "McCann reasons"... or because it's something you've done in the past and you don't want to think of it as poor parenting?

[Twosugars]

TS, it's bc he fancies Kate

[Vicky.]

Clarence Mitchell is their PR Spokesman......... I think I'll take his thoughts with a pinch of salt thanks :laugh:

Indeed :laugh: I cannot think of anyones opinion I would trust less tbh

[Vicky.]

look at the anguish here

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DSUgr3CUMAAZIf4.jpg

When Kate grows up a bit and loses her looks (which to be fair are very good, especiaslly for someone her age and with the stress she goes through) will you still be 'team McCann'? Never seen you defending Gerry, and you seem to love randomly posting Kate photos :laugh:

[Crimson Dynamo]

Indeed :laugh: I cannot think of anyones opinion I would trust less tbh

do you seriously think if he thought for one second 2 parents had murdered their child he would not go to the police?

he, more than anyone would be best placed

His testimony shows you how ridiculous the youtube conspiracy theories are

[Vicky.]

and you would blame your neighbour for being burgled for not having a dog?


:umm2:

I would 'blame' my neighbour for being burgled if they had gone out for hours, left their front door wide open along with all their windows. Insurance companies would too oddly enough.

Edit. Should maybe clarify my use of 'blame' here. It would be the fault of the burglar for stealing. But, the homeowners made it easy. All of this is kind of besides the point though as I don't believe an abductor existed.

[Vicky.]

do you seriously think if he thought for one second 2 parents had murdered their child he would not go to the police?



Don't care nor know what his personal opinion is really. But his job is media spin, so he's hardly going to do anything less than jab his tongue repeatedly up their arses.

[thesheriff443]

Hand on heart I’m still not 100 per cent convinced the parents were involved in what ever happened to maddie.

Any day the truth could come out, so if you are involved it must be a living nightmare.

Would cracks not start to show, so much time and money has been invested in this case.

If the evidence was there that the parents were involved I can’t see top police turning a blind eye.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Hand on heart I’m still not 100 per cent convinced the parents were involved in what ever happened to maddie.

Any day the truth could come out, so if you are involved it must be a living nightmare.

Would cracks not start to show, so much time and money has been invested in this case.

If the evidence was there that the parents were involved I can’t see top police turning a blind eye.

Members should avoid stacking information/"evidence" to prove a theory if a simpler explanation fits the observations

take a razor to them

[GoldHeart]

When Kate grows up a bit and loses her looks (which to be fair are very good, especiaslly for someone her age and with the stress she goes through) will you still be 'team McCann'? Never seen you defending Gerry, and you seem to love randomly posting Kate photos :laugh:

She looks more & more boney in the face with emotionless expression but if that's what's considered pretty then OK

[Marsh.]

Well, I've never come across it. The "norm" around anyone I know when taking kids on holiday is take them with you to eat, they just go to bed a bit later :shrug:

This. Or eating earlier to get back to the apartment earlier.

OR, something even easier when you have such a large group of people... taking it in turns to babysit the kids whilst people have an evening off.

[Vicky.]

This. Or eating earlier to get back to the apartment earlier.

OR, something even easier when you have such a large group of people... taking it in turns to babysit the kids whilst people have an evening off.

Quite, that would be so bloody easy and the parents would have had to miss out on ONE night each.

When we go away as a family, if its too late for the kids to go out (and 8pm or whatevers not considered late for kids on holiday) we do this, one adult watches them all. Easy. But thats of course for parents/family/friends who actually give a crap. Kids love it too as its like a sleepover, a bunch of kids in one room. Its quite stressful for the adult drawing the short straw though :D