Missing Madeleine

[ripple11]

she was unlucky that she was attacked.

Getting your locked apartment broken into and your child abducted is, by comparison, an everyday run-of-the-mill situation, is it?
When the McCann's are blamed for this outcome I think it is often a result of outcome-guided thinking rather than an appraisal of the scenario they encountered at the time. If you were sitting having dinner with them would you say 'best go check she isn't being abducted'?

I think the facts are the door wasnt locked.

[celtic]

Do you have children? What you do what they done?

Its not just the fact that she was abducted, i agree that that is a highly unlikely scenario but as i stated earlier, anything could have happened whilst the 3 kids were left alone in that apartment. All i'm saying that in my opinion (right or wrong) they shouldnt have put their children in that situation. I think they got what they deserve (if in fact thats what happened)

If you play a poker competion and consider your chips as children, would you put all your chips at risk with   knowing that someone could be waiting there with   . U have put them at unnecessary risk and got what you deserved by your actions.

[ifm]

I wouldn't gamble with my kids, they'd probably tell their mom and i'd be in serious trouble then.

[MANTIS01]

First and foremost. Andrew T do you really believe the things you are saying?

You find that you have killed your daughter and your first instinctive reaction is to protect yourself from a ruined life. Have you not just ruined your life?...and as such aren't any additional consequences insignificant? In such an emotional state to believe that the parents primary thought was to protect themselves from future financial hardship and a brief spell in prison is quite simply absurd.

But maybe there are some who believe this theory. They also believe the Loch Ness monster exists, the Americans were responsible for 9/11, the Queen killed Diana, E.T. was a true story, and Dr. Doolittle really could talk to the animals.

Secondly, the point Feris makes about the unsupervised girl in the bath is an excellent one. Does the mother deserve these consequences? Or is the distance of 20 yards unsupervised within the parameters of good parenting. What if she was actually outside hanging out the washing...does she now step outside those parameters? Is she now a neglectful ogre who brought this on herself. No? Well the McGanns were 50 yards from their sleeping children in full view of the apartment. Who has the god-given right to draw the line and say this makes them deserving of the consequences? I think you should be ashamed if you do.

Why don't we all live our lives to the beat of the paedophiles drum. They control us. The criminal minority are starting to dictate our every movement. Why cut the umbilical cord at all at birth...surely it is safer not to.

[celtic]

were 50 yards from their sleeping children in full view of the apartment.


If the apartment was in full view then how did they not see someone break in and take maddy?

[fearisthekey]

Do you have children? What you do what they done?

Its not just the fact that she was abducted, i agree that that is a highly unlikely scenario but as i stated earlier, anything could have happened whilst the 3 kids were left alone in that apartment. All i'm saying that in my opinion (right or wrong) they shouldnt have put their children in that situation. I think they got what they deserve (if in fact thats what happened)

If you play a poker competion and consider your chips as children, would you put all your chips at risk with   knowing that someone could be waiting there with   . U have put them at unnecessary risk and got what you deserved by your actions.

I do not think it is that hard to imagine the utter devastation wreaked on the McCann's by this incident and I would not wish that on anyone, no matter what they had done.
I would not have done what they did either. But I do not think they are *to blame* for what happened. Child abductions are extremely rare. For their actions to have had a reasonable element of culpability with regard to the outcome, the possibility of child abduction would have to be ignored by them where in fact it was a reasonable threat. It is not a reasonable threat. The chances are one in several million. The chances of an accident happening to an (*unattended*) child in a bath are far far greater.
The fact that this did happen in the McCann's case does not overrule the fact that it was always extremely unlikely to happen.

[celtic]

Every situation that happens there is someone that should take the blame with the exception of something that has happened by accident. They didnt leave their children in that apartment by accident therefore this situation has to have someone to blame. So who is to blame if the parents aren't? The children for wanting to go to sleep and not wanting to go the tapas bar?

[MANTIS01]

Using the poker analogy....

When you put your chips in with    you risk them! The alternative is to not play poker at all and live life as a secluded hermit wrapped in cotton wool. Do you think for one second..."I wont gamble with aces in case some poker deviant calls with 7-2 and outdraws me." 

No...but you think this is how the McGanns should have thought.

[technolog]

Every situation that happens there is someone that should take the blame with the exception of something that has happened by accident. They didnt leave their children in that apartment by accident therefore this situation has to have someone to blame. So who is to blame if the parents aren't? The children for wanting to go to sleep and not wanting to go the tapas bar?

The person who took her is the one to blame. The parents appear to be 'guilty' of some neglect. It is the severity of this neglect that people seem to be arguing about.

On more recent developments, I find it almost impossible to believe that the parents could dispose of a body whilst in the full glare of the media spotlight.

[celtic]

Not at all mantis i agree you cant wrap children up in cotton wool, my daughter goes to school, that involves a certain risk, she plays out with her friends where she lives with her mum & where she lives with me, thats a certain risk. But she is never left alone at home and both me & her mum live in quiet cul de sacs. If i lived on a busy main road she wouldnt be allowed to play on that road as it increases the risk of something happening to her. Why take unnecessary risks?

[celtic]

Guilty of some neglect/ to blame for the situation..... same difference?

[MANTIS01]

Yes the McGanns are clearly to blame for the existence of criminal deviants. In fact having a bite to eat a few yards away is pretty much the same as dropping the kids off in the town centre in the middle of the night. I mean surely they must be aware of the risk of kidnap while on holiday...it must say something about this in the brochure.

celtic you have assessed the risks of your individual situation and that's a good thing. But if something happened to your daughter while playing with her friends some complete stranger would have the right to question the boundaries you set and say why take those sort of risks and accuse you of neglect. Is that ok? To suggest that the McGanns boundaries are asking for trouble is thoroughly unreasonable.

[celtic]

Ok mantis thats a good post and you have made some good points etc regarding boundaries.

But is leaving 3 children aged 3 and under generally acceptable? it wasnt a few yards away,  i believe 50+ and in full view of the apartment (this couldnt be the case) as they would have seen any intruder. I jst think it was a complete lack of common sense on their part, stupidity in fact.

[turny]

Ok, the only real facts we know are that two supposedly educated individuals were in a foreign country and thought it was appropriate to leave their children, the oldest of which was 4 unattended in a holiday apartment whilst checking on them every half an hour while they jollyed it up in a tapas bar accross the way. Anything could have happened while they were out i.e Maddy could have woke up and played with matches etc. Just plain stupidity what they done. Distateful post by me maybe but as a father, my feeling is they deserve all they get.

so basically what your saying is that any parent that leaves there kid unattended for whatever amount of time deserves there child to be abducted ad/or murdered or to have a fatal accident?

what they done was wrong but not deserving of the consequences and if you feel that by doing one you deserve the other you must have psychological issues yourself.


What are you on about Paul? psychological problems? They left their children alone, she was 3 nearly 4 ffs, they had the option of having a babysitter that was approved by the holiday company which they decided against for whatever reason. This is 2007, there are a lot of sick people out there that wait for this kind of situation to arise. If she was abducted as they state then they only have themselves to blame for putting their children at risk. ONLY MY OPINION, not saying its a right or wrong opinion but dont shoot me down and suggest i have psycological issues for giving my opinion.

I hope they find her safe & well (Dont think that this will happen tho sadly)

read my posts again and i think you will find i never once said what they done was right.
and yes i think they do only have themselves to blame for whatever happened.

BUT... to say they got what they deserved is wrong and IMO someone who can say something so callously has issues!

[celtic]

Did i accuse of you saying that?

Ok, the only real facts we know are that two supposedly educated individuals were in a foreign country and thought it was appropriate to leave their children, the oldest of which was 4 unattended in a holiday apartment whilst checking on them every half an hour while they jollyed it up in a tapas bar accross the way. Anything could have happened while they were out i.e Maddy could have woke up and played with matches etc. Just plain stupidity what they done. Distateful post by me maybe but as a father, my feeling is they deserve all they get.

so basically what your saying is that any parent that leaves there kid unattended for whatever amount of time deserves there child to be abducted ad/or murdered or to have a fatal accident?

what they done was wrong but not deserving of the consequences and if you feel that by doing one you deserve the other you must have psychological issues yourself.


What are you on about Paul? psychological problems? They left their children alone, she was 3 nearly 4 ffs, they had the option of having a babysitter that was approved by the holiday company which they decided against for whatever reason. This is 2007, there are a lot of sick people out there that wait for this kind of situation to arise. If she was abducted as they state then they only have themselves to blame for putting their children at risk. ONLY MY OPINION, not saying its a right or wrong opinion but dont shoot me down and suggest i have psycological issues for giving my opinion.

I hope they find her safe & well (Dont think that this will happen tho sadly)

read my posts again and i think you will find i never once said what they done was right.
and yes i think they do only have themselves to blame for whatever happened.

BUT... to say they got what they deserved is wrong and IMO someone who can say something so callously has issues!