[Ronald.]

They're bl**dy evil those parents!! R.

[Niamh.]

The Judge-Counsellors continue: "It is true that the criminal investigation was eventually archived, in virtue of none of the evidence that led to the constitution of the claimants as arguidos was confirmed. Nonetheless, even in the archiving dispatch serious reservations are made about the verisimilitude (reality of) of the allegation that Madeleine had been abducted."

As to the presumption of innocence invoked by the parents, they (Judges) consider that one should not say "that the claimants were acquitted through the order of archiving the criminal proceedings (investigation). The archiving was determined because it was not possible to obtain sufficient evidence of the practice of crimes. It does not seem reasonable to consider that said archiving dispatch, based on insufficient evidence, should be equated as substantiation (proof) of exoneration".

https://joana-morais.blogspot.ie/201...cence.html?m=1

[Vicky.]

Yes. They were never cleared, despite what our press would have you believe. Quite glad this has all come back out now, though I don't expect to see anything change in our papers. Mind..it is a refreshing change to see amaral being referred to as 'senior detective' 'top cop' and such rather than the usual 'bungling officer' and such that they wrote previously.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Yes. They were never cleared, despite what our press would have you believe. Quite glad this has all come back out now, though I don't expect to see anything change in our papers. Mind..it is a refreshing change to see amaral being referred to as 'senior detective' 'top cop' and such rather than the usual 'bungling officer' and such that they wrote previously.

I just finished reading his book, really good. It's astonishing how they were not arrested, it does definitely seem like they would have been had there not been so much protection/interference from Britain, seems like that's where the PJ were headed

[user104658]

IMO there were mistakes made in the beginning that resulted in there not being enough evidence to charge / convict them but the Portuguese police know fine well what actually happened. I doubt they even consider the case "open", it'll be filed away under "Solved - no conviction" as many MANY crimes unfortunately are.

What baffles me is that the world (Britain, mainly) seems adamant on going along with a completely hypothetical / fictional narrative of "an abduction" when there is literally ZERO evidence of it happening. None! At all!

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

IMO there were mistakes made in the beginning that resulted in there not being enough evidence to charge / convict them but the Portuguese police know fine well what actually happened. I doubt they even consider the case "open", it'll be filed away under "Solved - no conviction" as many MANY crimes unfortunately are.

What baffles me is that the world (Britain, mainly) seems adamant on going along with a completely hypothetical / fictional narrative of "an abduction" when there is literally ZERO evidence of it happening. None! At all!

Yup and there is evidence of her having died in the apartment and evidence of a dead body having been in their hire car (the Dogs) not to mention stories being changed and lies and lack of co operation by the Tapas 9

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

I just finished reading his book, really good. It's astonishing how they were not arrested, it does definitely seem like they would have been had there not been so much protection/interference from Britain, seems like that's where the PJ were headed

Apparently, the DNA evidence...if it had happened in Britain arrests would have been made but more 'markers' are needed for a prosecution in Portugal. I would love to know why the turnaround from our officers tbh, given it was them who sent in the dogs to start with

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

IMO there were mistakes made in the beginning that resulted in there not being enough evidence to charge / convict them but the Portuguese police know fine well what actually happened. I doubt they even consider the case "open", it'll be filed away under "Solved - no conviction" as many MANY crimes unfortunately are.

What baffles me is that the world (Britain, mainly) seems adamant on going along with a completely hypothetical / fictional narrative of "an abduction" when there is literally ZERO evidence of it happening. None! At all!

Yes, and funnily enough, its those who don't believe the abduction storyline that are written off as conspiracy theorists

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Yes, and funnily enough, its those who don't believe the abduction storyline that are written off as conspiracy theorists

I know right I suppose, it's horrific to believe that parents could be involved in something like this but statistics prove that it's actually a far far more likely scenario than a stranger snatching her

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

I know right I suppose, it's horrific to believe that parents could be involved in something like this but statistics prove that it's actually a far far more likely scenario than a stranger snatching her

I fully believe it was an accident and I'd have felt horrific for them if they'd called (the portuguese equivalent of) 999 when they found her dead and admitted that there had been an accident that may have been partly their fault / through neglect. I don't believe for a second that they deliberately killed her or that they even thought they WERE endangering her. It would be heart-breaking. I'd have full sympathy for them... people make mistakes... sometimes with tragic consequences.

It's the calculated cover-up that I just can't comprehend... and everything else that has gone along with it.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

I fully believe it was an accident and I'd have felt horrific for them if they'd called (the portuguese equivalent of) 999 when they found her dead and admitted that there had been an accident that may have been partly their fault / through neglect. I don't believe for a second that they deliberately killed her or that they even thought they WERE endangering her. It would be heart-breaking. I'd have full sympathy for them... people make mistakes... sometimes with tragic consequences.

It's the calculated cover-up that I just can't comprehend... and everything else that has gone along with it.

Come on TS...these people deliberately left babies on their own so they could go out with friends. They were doctors (I speak of the group, not just the McCanns) who know more than anyone the risks of taking your eye off small children for a second let alone purposely leaving them alone. Risk of fire, choking, falls...the list goes on.

I don't think they murdered her at all. But to claim that they did not think they were endangering her?!

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Come on TS...these people deliberately left babies on their own so they could go out with friends. They were doctors (I speak of the group, not just the McCanns) who know more than anyone the risks of taking your eye off small children for a second let alone purposely leaving them alone. Risk of fire, choking, falls...the list goes on.

I don't think they murdered her at all. But to claim that they did not think they were endangering her?!

There is a variation in risk though and all anyone is ever doing is assessing acceptable risk. For example, I have an autistic non-verbal 4 year old, it would be safest for me to literally watch her like a hawk 24/7. I don't, though, she plays upstairs in her room on her own / with her sister etc. for several hours every day. Not only would it be totally impossible to have someone watch her 24/7... it would be unfair on her too to stop her from having those "normal" aspects of childhood. I also have a 7 year old daughter and it would be safest for me to not allow her to play outdoors in the summer with her peers... but it would be unfair and damaging to her in other ways and the real risks of anything happening to her (despite I will admit my own anxieties) is incredibly small.

I guess to use another universal aspect of "accepted risk" - it would be much safer to never ever put your child in a car... but this is a risk that the vast majority of people take, every day, for convenience / necessity. And because the risks are relatively small.

I *do* agree that leaving small children unattended in a holiday apartment should be considered an unacceptable risk for anyone to take, to the point that I consider it reckless / neglectful. However I am constantly amazed by the risks that other people are willing to take;

- Antihistamine doping,

- "monitor minding",

- Allowing 5 year olds to wander miles from home / to the local shops on their own,

- Riding around with helmetless kids on the back of quad-bikes

A few examples of things I've personally witnessed. But without exception, it's not that the parents realise the risks they are exposing their children to and simply don't care about the risks... it's that they have a skewed perception OF risk and haven't properly considered the potential consequences. In other words, it is a type of neglect, but it's through an expectation that "everything will be fine" that has gone too far.

I'm not making excuses really, I agree that the risk they were taking was far too big and (obviously) that turned out to be 100% accurate, but I think they were simply complacent and quite possibly arrogant. I think they probably knew that "most" would consider it unthinkable but, perhaps because they are doctors, I think they probably felt like "they knew better" and that there was no real risk.

[Vicky.]

I used to have a similar opinion and probably still should have but one thing stuck in my throat (fairly recently too) which seems to have knocked me back into a '****ing bastards' mindset where maybe I am not being fair

Kate admitting that the very same morning, Madeline had asked where she and Gerry had been the night before when her and one of the twins were crying for them.

Sorry, whatever your risk assesment and such...it takes a cruel and cold person to hear that from their own child and still chose to abandon them the same night again

As such I acknowledge that I am maybe unfair but I cannot get past that at all

[Kizzy]

I'd say the 'we are doctors we think we know better' has filtered down into the mainstream, it appears to be on a par with 'I remember when you could go out and leave your door open' and the onus be on the thief who chanced in.
But it isn't, you are not obliged to care for your home as you are your children, willful abandonment of them for however long by anyone should be seen as criminal neglect.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

I used to have a similar opinion and probably still should have but one thing stuck in my throat (fairly recently too) which seems to have knocked me back into a '****ing bastards' mindset where maybe I am not being fair

Kate admitting that the very same morning, Madeline had asked where she and Gerry had been the night before when her and one of the twins were crying for them.

Sorry, whatever your risk assesment and such...it takes a cruel and cold person to hear that from their own child and still chose to abandon them the same night again

As such I acknowledge that I am maybe unfair but I cannot get past that at all

True, that's unimaginable to me, too. That they could happily have gotten themselves dressed up and gone out, knowing that the kids had been upset about it already. But then again I also see that **** happening all the time, with parents screaming in their kids faces / dragging them along the street by the arm when they are clearly already very upset.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

I used to have a similar opinion and probably still should have but one thing stuck in my throat (fairly recently too) which seems to have knocked me back into a '****ing bastards' mindset where maybe I am not being fair

Kate admitting that the very same morning, Madeline had asked where she and Gerry had been the night before when her and one of the twins were crying for them.

Sorry, whatever your risk assesment and such...it takes a cruel and cold person to hear that from their own child and still chose to abandon them the same night again

As such I acknowledge that I am maybe unfair but I cannot get past that at all

Yeah totally. Also, why the need for these evening meals out as well, their kids were away in a Creche literally all day everyday but that wasn't enough "adult time" they still had to leave them at night too......and if the hotel staff were ok to mind them all day, why not hire them as sitters for the few hours in the evening too?

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

Yeah totally. Also, why the need for these evening meals out as well, their kids were away in a Creche literally all day everyday but that wasn't enough "adult time" they still had to leave them at night too......and if the hotel staff were ok to mind them all day, why not hire them as sitters for the few hours in the evening too?

The kids would have been asleep anyway... the sad fact is that some couples simply aren't able to just stay in and enjoy each others company and are only able to socially engage when surrounded by others (and alcohol).

[chuff me dizzy]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

IMO there were mistakes made in the beginning that resulted in there not being enough evidence to charge / convict them but the Portuguese police know fine well what actually happened. I doubt they even consider the case "open", it'll be filed away under "Solved - no conviction" as many MANY crimes unfortunately are.

What baffles me is that the world (Britain, mainly) seems adamant on going along with a completely hypothetical / fictional narrative of "an abduction" when there is literally ZERO evidence of it happening. None! At all!

If you look closely the word abduction is hardly used now

[chuff me dizzy]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

I used to have a similar opinion and probably still should have but one thing stuck in my throat (fairly recently too) which seems to have knocked me back into a '****ing bastards' mindset where maybe I am not being fair

Kate admitting that the very same morning, Madeline had asked where she and Gerry had been the night before when her and one of the twins were crying for them.

Sorry, whatever your risk assesment and such...it takes a cruel and cold person to hear that from their own child and still chose to abandon them the same night again

As such I acknowledge that I am maybe unfair but I cannot get past that at all

Maddie asking where you when i cried ,was a red herring to make people think she was alive that day ........ and they pushed the neglect lie to cover themselves, because without saying the kids had been left alone they could claim abduction

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by chuff me dizzy

Maddie asking where you when i cried ,was a red herring to make people think she was alive that day ........ and they pushed the neglect lie to cover themselves, because without saying the kids had been left alone they could claim abduction

On what night did Mrs Fenn claim to have heard a child cry was that not the night before?

[chuff me dizzy]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

On what night did Mrs Fenn claim to have heard a child cry was that not the night before?

2 nights before

[chuff me dizzy]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1EyU...Grvgvn5nkiY6fA

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by chuff me dizzy

2 nights before

thanks

[chuff me dizzy]

What did Colin Shalke find ?

http://fakedabduction.com/2010/06/ma...al-in-skipton/

[jet]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

I'm reading it online

http://frommybigdesk.blogspot.ie/201...f-lie.html?m=1

I haven't read it so thanks for the link Niamh.
I don't know as much as most here seem to about the case, but what puzzles me is if the McCanns are guilty, why would they not just let the case fizzle out years ago and get on with their lives having got off scot free? Why would they continually bring attention to it over and over, year after year and rake it all up yet again trying to sue the books author?
It's not as if they were hard up for the money they could make out of it; and they seem too astute and intelligent not to realise they would be accused of doing it just for attention. I just don't get what their aim is in keeping the case alive and in the news for all these years if they are guilty with the much increased chance of being caught out which those actions would bring...