Page 14 of 30

This whole Madeleine McCann thing...

Posted: Wed Sep 12, 2007 2:20 am
by Josef K_Archive
daniel robert chapman wrote:
Josef K wrote:
daniel robert chapman wrote:
So I find it interesting that the Portuguese Police seem to have been following the parental lead as closely as they have; I don't believe they are incompetent, and I think they must have some reason to be searching the McCann's hire cars, for example.

If there is no evidence pointing to an abductor, but some evidence pointing to the parents, well, it's a logical way to go, isn't it?

/ah, I wrote a load else but it amounted to nothing so fuck it/


I have not read that much about the case, I don't read the tabloids so I never bought into the whole frenzied approach and I don't want to get into analysing evidence but regarding the car, what's being implied here? that they disposed of the their child's body 20 odd days after she was killed. Is this a joke? That family have been under 24 hours-a-day surveilance since the story broke, do you think they would have had time to do that?

I can undertand people getting bored with the coverage but that's no reason to start fucking the family over.


No, I've not been on top of it either. And I find it difficult to work out how the McCanns could have moved the body too. But I don't understand why nothing else has come to light, or why the police have been actively pursuing this line, if there is nothing to it. Something must be driving the police in this direction; something that the media - and us - aren't privy to? That's why it seems plausible to me; because people who are much closer to this than you and I think it is. There was some reason to search a hire car used weeks after the toddler disappeared. What reason? I don't know, but some reason.

And let's be straight: media- and public-wise, the McCann's are still subject to enormous levels of popular support. Just look at those comments on the Daily Mail site - the 'silent majority' are convinced of their innocence and that clueless foreigners are to blame. The sympathy is still with them. In a way that makes the potential for them to be responsible all the more fascinating. I can't deny it; I am fascinated by the way this would play out if they are responsible. Well, the interaction between media and society has always interested me so there I am. That doesn't mean I'm hoping for that as an outcome, though.

It is all confusing and tough and overhyped and overdone. Do you know the McCann's are being advised by the law firm that successfully defended General Pincohet against extradition? Like, what am I supposed to make of that tidbit? I'm sure I don't know, but it's out there. And there's a lot of that kind of thing floating around.

So I reach for gallows humour and sick jokes because there is no way I can solve this case and if I'm not going to find the whole thing profoundly depressing - and I refuse to succumb to that - then I have to look lightly. It'll all happen around me anyway, whatever I do.


DRC, I don't want to paint myself into a corner by defending their every move, but I'm a father of two young children and when I put myself in the McCann's position, I honestly have sympathy with the helplessness that they must be feeling.

With regards the lawyer, it's not just the guilty that need good lawyers. Ok, he defended Pinochet against extradition, but I'm guessing that's not his specialisation. The McCanns are not poor and, aside from the money they get from public support funds or the papers or whatever, would undoubtedly be able to afford a good lawyer regardless. If I was innocent of an alleged crime, I would want the best defending me.

Gallows humour is ok in my book, but sometimes the lack of compassion, the incessant rumour mongering and eagerness to condemn, really depresses me.

This whole Madeleine McCann thing...

Posted: Wed Sep 12, 2007 2:34 am
by Cranius_Archive
You are right Josef. Everyone wants to get their condemnation in now. As Johnathon Freedland says in today's Guardian:

How could two people under constant media scrutiny possibly have carried out and hidden their daughter's body without being seen? If they really had concealed a corpse in their car, wouldn't the smell have been obvious? How could two people unfamiliar with the local landscape have found an eventual hiding place that would still, months later, remain undiscovered? Is it plausible to imagine that, in the moments after suffering the trauma of a dead child, two people could have constructed such an elaborate cover-up plan, executed it coolly and remained steady ever since? Could anybody maintain this front, a global lie, for so long without cracking?

Arguments like that are going on everywhere, in pubs or the train to work, as well as in newsrooms around the world. The McCanns must hate it but they cannot be surprised by it. For wholly understandable reasons, they chose to make the loss of their daughter public property, to recruit the media to their cause. So now we are like folk gathered in the village square, offering our two-pennyworth on the mysterious events that have befallen one benighted family.


But as he points out, their story is now public property, so the speculation will be excruciating for them.

This whole Madeleine McCann thing...

Posted: Wed Sep 12, 2007 2:56 am
by daniel robert chapman_Archive
I don't think we're really substantially disagreeing on this are we Josef K?

This whole Madeleine McCann thing...

Posted: Wed Sep 12, 2007 3:42 am
by Josef K_Archive
daniel robert chapman wrote:I don't think we're really substantially disagreeing on this are we Josef K?


No, Daniel I think we probably have a fairly similar view on the whole situation.

This whole Madeleine McCann thing...

Posted: Wed Sep 12, 2007 3:54 am
by gjhardwick_Archive
Josef K wrote:DRC, I don't want to paint myself into a corner by defending their every move, but I'm a father of two young children and when I put myself in the McCann's position, I honestly have sympathy with the helplessness that they must be feeling.




first up, lets stop calling each other cunts please.

Josef K - i don't have any children myself, but if i was in the McCanns position and just had my child (allegedly) abducted, i wouldn't be able to appear on TV the very next day doing a press conference because i would be bawling my eyes out with stress/worry/grief/etc.

As mentioned earlier in the thread, there has always been a worrying level of 'detachment' (for want of a better word) from the McCanns (particularly Kate McCann) during all these press junkets that will add fuel to the fire to any theory that they are responsible for the missing child.

This whole Madeleine McCann thing...

Posted: Wed Sep 12, 2007 4:05 am
by sparky_Archive
Cranius wrote:Thanks Space Junk, not only did my wife's car have the tyres let down, mirrors smashed off, and bonnet dented by our neighbour's children yesterday (the day before we donate it to Oxfam), I wake up and get called cunt.

Cheers.


Oh, for fuck's sake... So sorry to hear this, Andrew.

This whole Madeleine McCann thing...

Posted: Wed Sep 12, 2007 4:09 am
by simmo_Archive
gjhardwick wrote:first up, lets stop calling each other cunts please.


Seconded. I don't see what anyone's done that is especially cunty, and I don't think it adds anything to the discussion. Plus it's just plain rude.

gjhardwick wrote:Josef K - i don't have any children myself, but if i was in the McCanns position and just had my child (allegedly) abducted, i wouldn't be able to appear on TV the very next day doing a press conference because i would be bawling my eyes out with stress/worry/grief/etc.

As mentioned earlier in the thread, there has always been a worrying level of 'detachment' (for want of a better word) from the McCanns (particularly Kate McCann) during all these press junkets that will add fuel to the fire that they are responsible for the missing child.


I think this is a difficult one to judge. Whether you have children or not, it's very hard to say how you would react when faced with such a scenario. People do sometimes seem to have remarkable reserves of incredible emotional strength that they can draw on in these situations. Whether an individual might be able to face a press conference in the above situation depends pretty much wholly on that person's character, and their response to their suffering.

And the way people deal with grief has such a wide range too. Sometimes people pour themselves in to something in order to relieve the pain or distract themselves from it. A massive media campaign, for example, would be a good setting for this kind of avoidance behaviour.

I just think it's very hard to make any kind of call here... it's such an extraordinary situation, so it's likely to illicit an extraordinary reaction.

This whole Madeleine McCann thing...

Posted: Wed Sep 12, 2007 4:09 am
by Champion Rabbit
gjhardwick wrote:first up, lets stop calling each other cunts please.


That would be nice.

i wouldn't be able to appear on TV the very next day doing a press conference because i would be bawling my eyes out with stress/worry/grief/etc.


I reckon it's possible that you would appear on TV if you thought that by doing so your child's life could be saved. I agree that it's possible that you might not be able to, but surely either is a possibility?

People do all sorts of insane stuff to save their kids - lifting cars, throwing themselves in the path of trains, taking bullets. Appearing on TV in a state together enough to send messages with clarity is not the most bat-shit-crazy act one could make to save a child, surely?

This whole Madeleine McCann thing...

Posted: Wed Sep 12, 2007 4:13 am
by gjhardwick_Archive
of course not, but to do so with such a display of emotional detachment does seem a little bit odd...

This whole Madeleine McCann thing...

Posted: Wed Sep 12, 2007 4:20 am
by Josef K_Archive
gjhardwick wrote:
Josef K wrote:DRC, I don't want to paint myself into a corner by defending their every move, but I'm a father of two young children and when I put myself in the McCann's position, I honestly have sympathy with the helplessness that they must be feeling.




first up, lets stop calling each other cunts please.

Josef K - i don't have any children myself, but if i was in the McCanns position and just had my child (allegedly) abducted, i wouldn't be able to appear on TV the very next day doing a press conference because i would be bawling my eyes out with stress/worry/grief/etc.

As mentioned earlier in the thread, there has always been a worrying level of 'detachment' (for want of a better word) from the McCanns (particularly Kate McCann) during all these press junkets that will add fuel to the fire to any theory that they are responsible for the missing child.



I'd be bawling my eyes out too, but then again I'm a pretty emotional guy, some people aren't.

Gerry McCann is a surgeon, I believe. I don't know what his wife does. I'm sure he has to work in extremely stressful circumstances everyday and as his work requires be a very effective communicator, possibly requiring a great level of detachment when dealing with the worried relatives. The seem like pretty rational people and are probably perfectly able to weigh up the pros and cons of appearing calm and controlled, expaining exactly what they want the authorities and the public to do against breaking down and allowing the authorities to dictate to them what would happen. Being able to do that is not an indicator of guilt.