Madeleine McCann General Discussion Thread No. 25

[little_miss_smart]

Madeleine McCann is dead! Anyone who thinks otherwise is blinkered.

Cadaver dogs.

15 out of 19 DNA markers.

No evidence of an abduction at all.

The shutter in the room - Kates fingerprints.

The lies, the inconsistencies.

There is more out there that points to Madeleines death than not. There is more out there to suggest the McCanns are involved than not. JMO

 

[Barnaby]

Texana, your post (NO. 141) was excellent until this last sentence: "The betrayal of Madeleine McCann happened when her parents to chose to again leave her and two toddler siblings alone in a foreign hotel room, more than a 15-20 minute walk from the restaurant where they dined with friends, with doors that were perhaps unlocked, or perhaps not".

REPLY:

First point - it has been established that the walk from Tapas bar table to the apartment was in the region of 120 yards (110 metres for those who do metric) and the walking time for an average person would be around 1 minute and 20 seconds.

Second point - I think the whole scenario of Madeleine being abducted at around 9.15pm has been carefully staged, the story of half-hour checking etc. is wrong, the doors were neither 'unlocked' or 'locked' that night - the evidence points to Madeleine having died many hours before 10.00pm. Looking at the tangled stories of when and why the Tapas 9 were in and out of the McCanns' apartment that evening, it is apparent that there was a clean-up operation in the apartment that day and that Madeleine's body was removed to a safe location before the abduction alarm was raised at 10.00pm.

The evening of 3rd May was by no means a normal 'Tapas 9' evening at Praia da Luz. IMO they were play-acting normal in order to conceal a death.

A crime - and a reason for all four Doctors to be struck off the medical register

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

I agree with your theory Tony, I think it was all done & dusted before the alarm was raised!
Poor little girl did not deserve this, I so wish that she could have a decent burial! Alas, I do not think this will ever happen, when Gerry said "Find the body & prove that we did it" he was very confident!

Madeleine McCann is dead! Anyone who thinks otherwise is blinkered.

Cadaver dogs.

15 out of 19 DNA markers.

No evidence of an abduction at all.

The shutter in the room - Kates fingerprints.

The lies, the inconsistencies.

There is more out there that points to Madeleines death than not. There is more out there to suggest the McCanns are involved than not. JMO

Very much agree!

 

[Texana]

Texana, your post (NO. 141) was excellent until this last sentence: "The betrayal of Madeleine McCann happened when her parents to chose to again leave her and two toddler siblings alone in a foreign hotel room, more than a 15-20 minute walk from the restaurant where they dined with friends, with doors that were perhaps unlocked, or perhaps not".

REPLY:

First point - it has been established that the walk from Tapas bar table to the apartment was in the region of 120 yards (110 metres for those who do metric) and the walking time for an average person would be around 1 minute and 20 seconds.

Second point - I think the whole scenario of Madeleine being abducted at around 9.15pm has been carefully staged, the story of half-hour checking etc. is wrong, the doors were neither 'unlocked' or 'locked' that night - the evidence points to Madeleine having died many hours before 10.00pm. Looking at the tangled stories of when and why the Tapas 9 were in and out of the McCanns' apartment that evening, it is apparent that there was a clean-up operation in the apartment that day and that Madeleine's body was removed to a safe location before the abduction alarm was raised at 10.00pm.

The evening of 3rd May was by no means a normal 'Tapas 9' evening at Praia da Luz. IMO they were play-acting normal in order to conceal a death.

A crime - and a reason for all four Doctors to be struck off the medical register

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

I agree that with the staging scenario and everything else, just playing devil's advocate in that even if you believe the weak and obviously falsified abduction story, the likelihood that Madeleine is alive is unrealistic.

The attitude that anyone who doesn't totally believe that she's out there somewhere just waiting for one of us to stumble across her is somehow not "there" for Madeleine--ridiculous.

 

[Texana]

Tony, I forgot to add, excellent point about the doctors being taken off the Registry, I assume that's the equivalent of the American license to practice medicine.

 

[Texana]

Madeleine McCann is dead! Anyone who thinks otherwise is blinkered.

Cadaver dogs.

15 out of 19 DNA markers.

No evidence of an abduction at all.

The shutter in the room - Kates fingerprints.

The lies, the inconsistencies.

There is more out there that points to Madeleines death than not. There is more out there to suggest the McCanns are involved than not. JMO

DING DING DING we have a winner for best summary in shortest amount of words.

 

[colomom]

DING DING DING we have a winner for best summary in shortest amount of words.

Ain't that the truth....time for the banana dance.... :Banane57:

 

[feynmanadmirer]

Hi everybody. Thank you for this wonderful platform to voice my opinion and for the contributions of all the members on this thread that I’ve been reading with great interest.

In the case of deciding “who is responsible” for the little girl’s disappearance I would use the Occam’s razor, as Colomom here referred to in one of his/her previous posts. For all we know, there may have been the Martians who abducted the girl and planted false memories in her parents’ heads to the effect that they themselves (the parents) think they are responsible for her disappearance, which resulted in all this mess. But we aren’t going to discuss those sort of scenarios. So when taking into account of what we know about the case it looks like parents are guilty of more than only leaving their children alone unsupervised. It looks as if they know much more than they are willing to publicly admit. To all of this I’d only say “so what?” Sorry. Please, let me explain.

I, for one, am not going to assume a “holier than thou” attitude towards the McCanns. To leave your children unsupervised when you are getting soused in a nearby drinking establishment, to me, I am sorry, but doesn’t sound like a big crime at all. We don’t get publicly humiliated nor convicted for things that are far worse than that. Also to want to have a holiday where you can have a rest from your work a n d your children as well, to me is not a crime either. As an aside, I enjoy the company of my children, but I can understand people who are built on different blue prints.

Now let’s tackle the rest of their possible crimes.
1. K, G overdosed M with some sort of a sedative.
2. K, G accidentally killed M in some other way.
3. M walked away on her own and got lost.
4. M got abducted.

What in our eyes makes the McCanns despicable criminals, I think, is that we think they are responsible for one of the above AND they tried to cover it up so as to save their skins, their licenses, their way of living.
But isn’t that understandable? They had two options:

A. To lose credibility as professional doctors in the public’s eye, be hounded by the media and possibly be jailed because of their negligence.
B. To become rich and famous.

As an upside of the first option, you would have been able to give your child a decent burial or, if she disappeared, genuinely search for her.

They chose the second option. Some of us probably aren’t too sure of what we would do ourselves in the circumstances, but we would expect to be hated and hounded by the world and by our own consciences if we chose the second option. So we treat them the way we would expect ourselves to be treated in case we made a mistake to choose the second option.

Now another point, if you’d be so patient. To me it is obvious that K is more responsible for what happened to her daughter than G is. Their body languages speak to me that G is covering up for K. The way K looks up to G, the way G is the spokesperson of their family. Had G been more responsible for their misfortune, no matter how faithful K may have been to her husband, some sort of hatred and mistrust would have shown through her public façade.

Now, is it not admirable to stick to your partner no matter what? Does G deserve to be so widely hated as he is? Does lying so as to safe your loved one is such a crime?

As for why T9 sticking together makes them all so despicable in the public’s eye, I think it has a lot to do with the fact that they all are doctors. Had they been, say, sailors or actors or nearly anything except probably politicians or lawyers, their wall of silence or conspiracy would have been seen in a much more positive light, I reckon.

If you will bear with me, please,
there is one more possible scenario additional to the ones mentioned above. There was a question of the McCanns producing poster quality pictures of their daughter on a very short notice. It was as if they had brought the pictures of M from England ready for publication as it were. The case was widely discussed on the 3A forum. Sorry, if the mystery of the pictures has been solved and shelved, and only I am not aware of that. If not, was it possible that they planned the abduction of their daughter before even going to Portugal? Did they plan to pay their mortgages and rise to what they consider to be “the top” by way of staging and probably conducting the disappearance of their daughter? If it is the case, then the Macs are probably the first to have done something that by most moral standards would be considered to be cruel or even inhuman.

Thank you for your attention and sorry for the long inaugural speech

 

[Tony Bennett]

Hi everybody. Thank you for this wonderful platform to voice my opinion and for the contributions of all the members on this thread that I’ve been reading with great interest.

In the case of deciding “who is responsible” for the little girl’s disappearance I would use the Occam’s razor, as Colomom here referred to in one of his/her previous posts. For all we know, there may have been the Martians who abducted the girl and planted false memories in her parents’ heads to the effect that they themselves (the parents) think they are responsible for her disappearance, which resulted in all this mess. But we aren’t going to discuss those sort of scenarios. So when taking into account of what we know about the case it looks like parents are guilty of more than only leaving their children alone unsupervised. It looks as if they know much more than they are willing to publicly admit. To all of this I’d only say “so what?” Sorry. Please, let me explain.

I, for one, am not going to assume a “holier than thou” attitude towards the McCanns. To leave your children unsupervised when you are getting soused in a nearby drinking establishment, to me, I am sorry, but doesn’t sound like a big crime at all. We don’t get publicly humiliated nor convicted for things that are far worse than that. Also to want to have a holiday where you can have a rest from your work a n d your children as well, to me is not a crime either. As an aside, I enjoy the company of my children, but I can understand people who are built on different blue prints.

Now let’s tackle the rest of their possible crimes.
1. K, G overdosed M with some sort of a sedative.
2. K, G accidentally killed M in some other way.
3. M walked away on her own and got lost.
4. M got abducted.

What in our eyes makes the McCanns despicable criminals, I think, is that we think they are responsible for one of the above AND they tried to cover it up so as to save their skins, their licenses, their way of living.
But isn’t that understandable? They had two options:

A. To lose credibility as professional doctors in the public’s eye, be hounded by the media and possibly be jailed because of their negligence.
B. To become rich and famous.

As an upside of the first option, you would have been able to give your child a decent burial or, if she disappeared, genuinely search for her.

They chose the second option. Some of us probably aren’t too sure of what we would do ourselves in the circumstances, but we would expect to be hated and hounded by the world and by our own consciences if we chose the second option. So we treat them the way we would expect ourselves to be treated in case we made a mistake to choose the second option.

Now another point, if you’d be so patient. To me it is obvious that K is more responsible for what happened to her daughter than G is. Their body languages speak to me that G is covering up for K. The way K looks up to G, the way G is the spokesperson of their family. Had G been more responsible for their misfortune, no matter how faithful K may have been to her husband, some sort of hatred and mistrust would have shown through her public façade.

Now, is it not admirable to stick to your partner no matter what? Does G deserve to be so widely hated as he is? Does lying so as to safe your loved one is such a crime?

As for why T9 sticking together makes them all so despicable in the public’s eye, I think it has a lot to do with the fact that they all are doctors. Had they been, say, sailors or actors or nearly anything except probably politicians or lawyers, their wall of silence or conspiracy would have been seen in a much more positive light, I reckon.

If you will bear with me, please,
there is one more possible scenario additional to the ones mentioned above. There was a question of the McCanns producing poster quality pictures of their daughter on a very short notice. It was as if they had brought the pictures of M from England ready for publication as it were. The case was widely discussed on the 3A forum. Sorry, if the mystery of the pictures has been solved and shelved, and only I am not aware of that. If not, was it possible that they planned the abduction of their daughter before even going to Portugal? Did they plan to pay their mortgages and rise to what they consider to be “the top” by way of staging and probably conducting the disappearance of their daughter? If it is the case, then the Macs are probably the first to have done something that by most moral standards would be considered to be cruel or even inhuman.

Thank you for your attention and sorry for the long inaugural speech

REPLIES to feynmanadmirer:

feynmanadmirer: To leave your children unsupervised when you are getting soused in a nearby drinking establishment, to me, I am sorry, but doesn’t sound like a big crime at all.

REPLY: I've crossed you off the list of people who could babysit for my grandchildren, then. We have gone into all the risks of this course of action before in this forum, but let's just mention: playing with matches, fire, playing with cooker, other emergency, vomiting, choking, falling over, cutting yourself, swallowing drugs that look like sweets...and many more clear risks.

++++++++

feynmanadmirer: Also to want to have a holiday where you can have a rest from your work a n d your children as well, to me is not a crime either.

REPLY: Not a crime. But weird when it comes to children so young. If the strain of being with them is so great, then leave them with a caring relative while you have a good break. There a few greater joys offered on this planet than watching and helping toddlers and young children learn about their environment, there are endless things to enjoy, to laugh at and wonder at.

++++++++

feynmanadmirer: I enjoy the company of my children, but I can understand people who are built on different blue prints.

REPLY: Speaking as an ex-social worker, if I encountered a parent whose 'blueprint' meant they didn't enjoy the company of their children, I would place that parent under a period of therapy/assessment and, at the end of it, if the assessment still showed significant concerns, I would explore the possibility of the children being taken into the home of loving relatives - or failing that take care proceedings to remove the children from that home and protect them.

++++++++

feynmanadmirer: "...to cover it up so as to save their skins, their licenses, their way of living. But isn’t that understandable?"

REPLY: Understandable, I concede. But saying something is 'understandable' is a million miles away from making it right, either in the eyes of the general public, or the law.

++++++++

feynmanadmirer: "As an upside of the first option, you would have been able to give your child a decent burial..."

REPLY: For what it's worth, I am inclined to the view that Madeleine was buried - by friends of the McCanns, and while they were visiting the Pope.

++++++++

feynmanadmirer: "To me it is obvious that K is more responsible for what happened to her daughter than G is..."

REPLY: You are one of the many to say so.

++++++++

feynmanadmirer: "Now, is it not admirable to stick to your partner no matter what? Does G deserve to be so widely hated as he is? Does lying so as to safe your loved one is such a crime?"

REPLY: Are you losing sight of the fact that a crime seems to have been committed here? Death by accident, negligence, neglect or deliberate act. Denying the child an inquest. Hiding a body. Perverting or interfering with the course of justice. Fraud on a masive scale in setting up the Helping to Find Madeleine Trust Fund?

++++++++

feynmanadmirer: "As for why T9 sticking together makes them all so despicable in the public’s eye, I think it has a lot to do with the fact that they all are doctors. Had they been, say, sailors or actors or nearly anything except probably politicians or lawyers, their wall of silence or conspiracy would have been seen in a much more positive light, I reckon".

REPLY: No. Their wall of silence is self-serving and to be condemned no more or no less than for anyone else who deliberately covers up a serious crime.

++++++++

feynmanadmirer: "There was a question of the McCanns producing poster quality pictures of their daughter on a very short notice. It was as if they had brought the pictures of M from England ready for publication as it were".

REPLY: For what it is worth, I reject all theories which suggest that this death/disappearance of Madeleine was pre-planned. The scenario which best fits the known facts here is that Madeleine perished during the night of 2nd/3rd May and that Gerry and or others hastily got some poster-size prints of Madeleine prepared during that day. I suspect he was busily
engaged during 3rd May in working out how to 'play' it at 10.00pm that night and that included having a supply of posters ready. I doubt he was 'playing tennis' continuously from 3.30pm to 7.00pm as he claims. The Ocean Club and police seem to have confirmed that those Madeleine posters could not have been produced on site

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

 

[twinkiesmom]

I, for one, am not going to assume a “holier than thou” attitude towards the McCanns. To leave your children unsupervised when you are getting soused in a nearby drinking establishment, to me, I am sorry, but doesn’t sound like a big crime at all. We don’t get publicly humiliated nor convicted for things that are far worse than that. Also to want to have a holiday where you can have a rest from your work a n d your children as well, to me is not a crime either. As an aside, I enjoy the company of my children, but I can understand people who are built on different blue prints.

Thank you for your attention and sorry for the long inaugural speech

You obviously don't live in America, where people are sitting in prison for being less negligent than the McCanns. The Georgia case with the two drowned toddlers for one.

Parenting is a 24-7-365 proposition....There may be a short break but there is no holiday.

 

[twinkiesmom]

Now another point, if you’d be so patient. To me it is obvious that K is more responsible for what happened to her daughter than G is.

Or Kate has a working conscience whereas grinning Gerry does not.

 

[colomom]

Hello feynmanadmirer,

First thing....colomom is my nick and I really am a mom, hence I am a she. Just wanted to clear that up .

Second, while I enjoyed your post and I welcome your contribution, there is very little that I agree with there. That does not make it right or wrong, just it is what it is.

I believe that no matter what we do, there are forces that will bring all things into balance, eventually. I just pray that Madeleine is not suffering now.

So, welcome, I am looking forward to hearing from you again.

 

[Texana]

Welcome to the board.

With all due respect, it doesn't matter whether or not you think leaving small children unsupervised while you are at a bar many yards away (too far to see, hear, or even get to them in time for fire) it is against the law with serious penalties for a good reason--not just in the United States but in countries such as Great Britain as well.

I'm not sure what things you are referring to that are worse, that people aren't convicted or humiliated for--but that doesn't matter either. Letting the McCanns off the responsibility hook just because someone somewhere else gets away with something morally worse, doesn't make sense.

Rewrite the scenario. What if Mrs. Fenn, in the upstairs apartment, had been a chain smoker who fell asleep in bed with a lit cigarette? In the metroplex near me every year at least two or more children die in fires--and they were left unattended.

Nobody is saying that the McCanns and the other members of the Tapas dining party had to be with their children all evening and every hour of the day. The desire to be with children or not while relaxing or whatever has nothing to do with this fact:

The McCanns presented as one (of the several) reasons that they left the children alone was that "they didn't want the children with strangers." (even though the "stranger" would have been one of the childcare workers from the creche that the children knew.)

So they chose to leave their children ALONE rather than with a "stranger." What the hell kind of reasoning is that?

It's so bizarre that it actually argues more for a staging scenario/accidental death.

All the same, Kate still claimed that what kept her going in the immediate days after the "disappearance" was "the knowledge that we are responsible parents."

Delusional. Not responsible.

 

[twinkiesmom]

Nobody is saying that the McCanns and the other members of the Tapas dining party had to be with their children all evening and every hour of the day.

No, the point is that SOMEONE should have been watching them...Since the Tapas group had made use of the creche during the day and had their grown-up time without the children, they should have made the sacrifice to spend the evening with their children or hired a nanny to do so in their place OR they could have taken turns doing the child minding while Tapas 9minus1 had their party.

It's sick and demented to think this is normal parental behavior...to leave babies unattended....especially babies that you had fought to bring into this world.

 

[SleuthMom]

which I confess I forgot about earlier-too busy waving McCann banners and sending them fan letters :Banane31::deal: :uk:

LOL!!! I won't be surprised in the least. :crazy:

 

[Texana]

No, the point is that SOMEONE should have been watching them...Since the Tapas group had made use of the creche during the day and had their grown-up time without the children, they should have made the sacrifice to spend the evening with their children or hired a nanny to do so in their place OR they could have taken turns doing the child minding while Tapas 9minus1 had their party.

It's sick and demented to think this is normal parental behavior...to leave babies unattended....especially babies that you had fought to bring into this world.

Exactly. What sickens me is that the McCanns wanted it both ways. They wanted and still want to be perceived as "good parents." They constantly bring up how they are doing this or that for the twins--they have the Clarence Media Machine cranking out interviews with friends that talk about what a good mother Kate is--they even defend their decision because it "felt so safe."

However, they don't want to sacrifice one tiny bit to actually be good parents. We know that May 3--if Madeleine was indeed alive that night--was NOT the first night the children were left alone. So they chose not to hire a sitter for at least one night when she was still alive--to save money? They didn't put the children in the night time creche so they wouldn't have to bother taking them back and putting them to bed again?

I honestly can accept they are selfish parents and I can believe they participated in a cover up to save their own skins and preserve what was left of their family, simply because they seem to feel so entitled to everything. They felt entitled to have a good and primarily adult-oriented time on holiday even though they brought along small children, they feel they are entitled to be considered good parents by the rest of the world.

So, would they be entitled to feel that "bending" a few laws was okay? You bet. They epitomize arrogance and entitlement with their previous decisions, they cannot change in a crisis, or for that matter, the rest of their lives.

 

[twinkiesmom]

Exactly. What sickens me is that the McCanns wanted it both ways. They wanted and still want to be perceived as "good parents." They constantly bring up how they are doing this or that for the twins--they have the Clarence Media Machine cranking out interviews with friends that talk about what a good mother Kate is--they even defend their decision because it "felt so safe."

However, they don't want to sacrifice one tiny bit to actually be good parents. We know that May 3--if Madeleine was indeed alive that night--was NOT the first night the children were left alone. So they chose not to hire a sitter for at least one night when she was still alive--to save money? They didn't put the children in the night time creche so they wouldn't have to bother taking them back and putting them to bed again?

I honestly can accept they are selfish parents and I can believe they participated in a cover up to save their own skins and preserve what was left of their family, simply because they seem to feel so entitled to everything. They felt entitled to have a good and primarily adult-oriented time on holiday even though they brought along small children, they feel they are entitled to be considered good parents by the rest of the world.

So, would they be entitled to feel that "bending" a few laws was okay? You bet. They epitomize arrogance and entitlement with their previous decisions, they cannot change in a crisis, or for that matter, the rest of their lives.

The "good parents" schtick is just clever marketing strategy to shake a few coins from children and pensioners to keep the fund going. No one with any sense thinks they're good parents.

What gets to me is why anyone thinks these two are any better than Casey Anthony? Both neglected or killed their daughter to party. The McCann's are just cleaner cut and better educated...morally, I don't see much difference.

 

[Texana]

The "good parents" schtick is just clever marketing strategy to shake a few coins from children and pensioners to keep the fund going. No one with any sense thinks they're good parents.

What gets to me is why anyone thinks these two are any better than Casey Anthony? Both neglected or killed their daughter to party. The McCann's are just cleaner cut and better educated...morally, I don't see much difference.

There's not much difference. If the McCanns had been minority parents in any city, they would be sitting in prison right now.

 

[ThoughtFox]

I, for one, am not going to assume a “holier than thou” attitude towards the McCanns. To leave your children unsupervised when you are getting soused in a nearby drinking establishment, to me, I am sorry, but doesn’t sound like a big crime at all. We don’t get publicly humiliated nor convicted for things that are far worse than that. Also to want to have a holiday where you can have a rest from your work a n d your children as well, to me is not a crime either. As an aside, I enjoy the company of my children, but I can understand people who are built on different blue prints.

Number One: They didn't have to take their kids on holiday with them - that was a choice.

Number Two: They could have had a babysitter "in the room" with the kids. That is something anyone in the U.S. would do. I've known people who always travel with a relative who can stay in the room with the kids so the other adults can go down to have a drink. That is logical.

Leaving three very young kids alone with an unlocked door and magically believing they are "safe as houses or backgardens" is undeniably risky and neglectful.

 

[ThoughtFox]

There's not much difference. If the McCanns had been minority parents in any city, they would be sitting in prison right now.

Absolutely. I don't know why this is even debated!!!

I did a Google Search for "Child Neglect" news stories:

Manassas Virginia: Parents Arrested After Children Found Home Alone
~Two boys, 4 and 5, left locked in a bedroom without parents home - taken into Child Protective Custody.

Fremont Nebraska: Mother Charged with Child Neglect
~The Mom let two small kids play in the front yard and road around some cars, and wouldn't answer the door, so she was charged with neglect. She wasn't far away, but she wasn't watching her kids, end of story.

Tampa Florida: Wandering Tot Earns Mom Child Neglect Charge
~This one speaks for itself - and it sounds vaguely familiar:

SPRING HILL - A woman was charged with child neglect Thursday after a motorist saw her 3-year-old son wandering around her front yard.

The passerby called authorities around 2:15 p.m. and the reporting deputy, William Horvath, said he found the child wearing only a diaper and playing with electrical wiring at 4364 Lamson Ave.

Horvath left the child with the concerned citizen and walked through the open front door to investigate. He and his backup deputy discovered the mother, 19-year-old Melissa Crossman, sleeping under a blanket, a report states.

Crossman was awoken and told her son was outside playing in the front yard.

Her alleged reply: "Ah, he got out the front door again."

The suspect was led outside to join her son, while the deputies made another search of the house. Horvath said he found the house in "disarray," with piles of dirty dishes and bottles of medication and toxic household cleaners within easy access of the child. When the deputy asked the child to demonstrate how he got out of the house, the tot snapped the child safety latch, unlocked the deadbolt and unlocked the doorknob "in a matter of seconds," a report states.

Horvath consulted with the State Attorney's Office and they agreed that a child neglect charged was appropriate.

 

[feynmanadmirer]

Hello feynmanadmirer,

First thing....colomom is my nick and I really am a mom, hence I am a she. Just wanted to clear that up .

Second, while I enjoyed your post and I welcome your contribution, there is very little that I agree with there. That does not make it right or wrong, just it is what it is.

I believe that no matter what we do, there are forces that will bring all things into balance, eventually. I just pray that Madeleine is not suffering now.

So, welcome, I am looking forward to hearing from you again.

Hi colomom. Thank you for your welcome and everyone who has responded. And it’s ok you, or Tony Bennett or twinkiesmom not agreeing with most of what I said. Funny enough I do agree with most of what you’ve said in nearly all the messages I’ve read.

Please don’t get me wrong, I am not condoning the behaviour of people who leave their babies unattended. I agree with Tony Bennett here regarding the dangers of : “playing with matches, fire, playing with cooker, other emergency, vomiting, choking, falling over, cutting yourself, swallowing drugs that look like sweets...and many more clear risks”
My saying “it’s not a crime” really meant that most of us are so prone to doing all sorts of offences, and then we try to get away with whatever we do. Hands up who has done something punishable by law, got away with it, and then actually surrendered herself to the authorities to be punished? Say, you exceeded the speed limit and were NOT apprehended by the police, would you go to them voluntarily and pay the fine and surrender your drivers’ license happily informing the officer that you were drunk when driving too?

The most hateful aspect of the Macs activity, I think, has to do with them going too far in their attempt to appear innocent. It is meeting the Pope, collecting all that money, meeting important people and - what is worst – enjoying their new found celebrity status which was arguably based on lies.

Here I think they didn’t have much of a choice, though. Once they decided to get away with the murder, they couldn’t very well say, they didn’t need the money or support to search for M, could they? And when their well placed pals and the public offered their help, they had to play along by gracefully and gratefully accepting the donations. Now it all has snowballed into a farce, over which they arguably haven’t much control. The Macs have to keep going “kissing kiddies” and “launching balloons”.

As for G rooting for K.
Again, I ask you, if your daughter accidentally committed a manslaughter and you were the sole witness, the only one who could land her in prison or let her go free, would you testify against your own daughter or you’d rather keep quiet or lie? That I think was the dilemma G was facing in respect to K.

Now, colomom, the only problem I’ve ever had with your posts – and this line disappointed me, to be honest - was your saying

<quote>
[snip] I just pray that Madeleine is not suffering now.
</quote>

Here I agree with the famous philosopher Daniel Dennett who in his letter “Thank goodness I’m alive” expressed the opinion that <quote> if you truly wish somebody to do well, then would it not be better to take the time and resources devoted to prayer and devote them to doing something that is actually useful? </quote>

And one of my best loved quotes on this forum was what Refugee was saying on his/her message #446 (thread 24)

<quote>
[snip].. but I will say this, just like those who believe in a god, I have a right not to believe in a god! It is a bit unfair that those who believe are allowed to make religious statements, but those who dont are told we must keep quiet and respect the beliefs of the god fearing!
</quote>

I really loved that.

Thank you.