Madeleine McCann

[Saaf_laandon_mo]

Originally Posted by etccarmageddon

even if she is charged there are two points to keep in mind a)innocent until PROVED guilty and via the proper court process and b)the police investigation has been an utter shambles - eg. the appartment/crime scene has been contaminated.

Aren't the new developments a result of the UK forensic tests?

[andygrif]

Originally Posted by danielf

It is true that the press are not above responsibility, but to seek press attention in the way the McCanns did, and not expect this outcome would be highly naive. That's not to say they wanted this outcome obviously, but you can't go and seek attention and then expect to control what is printed.

And what would you do if your daughter went missing? Would you just sit there waiting for the police to bring her back, or would you spend every waking hour looking for her and encouraging everyone else to the same?

Originally Posted by Saaf_laandon_mo

In all honesty mate there's quite a few people (myself included, as well as some others on this forum) who have thought the parents were somehow involved, long before this development.

Suspicion hasn't just started in the last few days or even today.

The problem is they're damned if they do and damned if they don't; what they have done is a perfectly natural reaction to having your daughter abducted, but sadly it's also what someone who might be covering up something to protect themselves might do...

...same outcome, polar oposite reasons.

And I think it's unfair and quite distasteful to be speculating as to whether the parents did or didn't have anything to do with her disappearence, when none of us are actually in possession of very many of the facts at this stage.

I don't know if the parents had anything to do with it or not, and I will withold judgment until proven guilty! However something is not right about this whole crime!!

What really get's to me is that if me and my wife just popped across the road to a friends house for example and simply left our children alone and asleep in our home and something happened like that to one of our children then no doubt we would be prosecuted and have social services take away the rest of our children!!!

[slug]

Originally Posted by andygrif

And I think it's unfair and quite distasteful to be speculating as to whether the parents did or didn't have anything to do with her disappearence, when none of us are actually in possession of very many of the facts at this stage.

I don't think there is anything wrong with speculating, it is human nature.
All I will say is if I am ever up in court I would like the jury made up of the people on here who can't see which way this case is going.

Originally Posted by slug

I don't think there is anything wrong with speculating, it is human nature.
All I will say is if I am ever up in court I would like the jury made up of the people on here who can't see which way this case is going.

Do you mean 'can't see' or 'refuse to be drawn on incomplete information'?

[etccarmageddon]

Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees

...2) Sources to support crime scene contamination ?

firstly this:-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disappe...tuguese_police

"Controversy ensued on 17 June when Chief Inspector Olegário de Sousa said that the presence of so many people in the apartment from which Madeleine disappeared, after she was found to be missing, complicated the work of the scientific team. He added that this could have destroyed all the evidence and could prove to be fatal for the investigation."

the presence of so many people in the apartment from which Madeleine disappeared, after she was found to be missing=contaminated


then this:-

"However, the British police team, brought in to assist, in early August found microscopic traces of blood on the wall of the apartment from which Madeleine disappeared and that had not been detected by the Portuguese police. Using specially-trained sniffer dogs and ultraviolet technology they discovered the blood despite the apartment having being cleaned and reoccupied"

apartment having being cleaned and reoccupied=contaminated

---------- Post added at 14:49 ---------- Previous post was at 14:48 ----------

Originally Posted by Saaf_laandon_mo

Aren't the new developments a result of the UK forensic tests?

correct but some of the results are on tests done within the apartment in August long after Madeline went missing and after the room was contaminated. I dont see how any of this evidence from the apartment could be 'sound' considering that the scene wasn't as undisturbed as possible. Also the chance of a fair trial is ruined because evidence to prove they're (whoever is in the dock) innocent might have also been destroyed by post scene contamination.

[slug]

Originally Posted by Chris T

Do you mean 'can't see' or 'refuse to be drawn on incomplete information'?

If I were playing poker and I never won a hand, I would at some point say that the game was fixed, before I could prove it.

Originally Posted by slug

If I were playing poker and I never won a hand, I would at some point say that the game was fixed, before I could prove it.

If you were a detective, that would be reasonable grounds for suspicion, and therefore a line of enquiry. But you were talking about jury service, not being a detective. Suspicions and probabilities have no place in the jury room in a criminal trial, where the threshold for conviction is 'beyond reasonable doubt'.

You can't have it both ways. Would you like to judge your fellow posters against the job description of a detective or a juror?

[slug]

Originally Posted by Chris T

If you were a detective, that would be reasonable grounds for suspicion, and therefore a line of enquiry. But you were talking about jury service, not being a detective. Suspicions and probabilities have no place in the jury room in a criminal trial, where the threshold for conviction is 'beyond reasonable doubt'.

You can't have it both ways. Would you like to judge your fellow posters against the job description of a detective or a juror?

Don't really understand the point you are making?
When we post here we are neither a detective or a juror.
We are people giving a personal opinion.
The point I was making was that some people are incredibly forgiving when it seems to me that this case is only going to play out in one way.

Originally Posted by slug

Don't really understand the point you are making?
When we post here we are neither a detective or a juror.
We are people giving a personal opinion.
The point I was making was that some people are incredibly forgiving when it seems to me that this case is only going to play out in one way.

And my ultimate point is, there is a hang 'em high contingent on this forum who think that police suspicion is as good as a conviction. And despite your protestations, if you think we're being 'forgiving' based on the information in the public domain, you apparently are one of them.

Otherwise, what is there to 'forgive' anyone for?

Innocent until proven guilty, that's the main thing I am insisting on. And in support of that, not drawing conclusions that go beyond the available evidence, especially when some of that 'evidence' is simply our own flawed understanding of how police investigations in a foreign country are handled.

I am open minded about this case. The parents *could* have done it. I have said all along that the information available, by which I mean actual evidence, not dodgy interpretations of police activity, is not nearly weighty enough to convince me that they did, or even make me suspicious that they did.

[slug]

Originally Posted by Chris T

And my ultimate point is, there is a hang 'em high contingent on this forum who think that police suspicion is as good as a conviction. And despite your protestations, if you think we're being 'forgiving' based on the information in the public domain, you apparently are one of them.

Otherwise, what is there to 'forgive' anyone for?

Innocent until proven guilty, that's the main thing I am insisting on. And in support of that, not drawing conclusions that go beyond the available evidence, especially when some of that 'evidence' is simply our own flawed understanding of how police investigations in a foreign country are handled.

You keep coming back to hang 'em high. I have never said that and there is very little of that in this thread. I want this case to be resolved. I think we are very close to that now.

[etccarmageddon]

I dont think there will be case resolution until they find her.

Originally Posted by slug

You keep coming back to hang 'em high. I have never said that and there is very little of that in this thread. I want this case to be resolved. I think we are very close to that now.

Indeed you didn't - it's a parody intended to help make a point about a particular mindset. Sorry if I wasn't clear enough.

However your belief that the case is 'very close' to being resolved further illustrates my point. If the parents are even charged, the case will not be resolved until they are convicted in court. That would not be for some considerable time yet.

I take it, however, that for you, simply an accusation by the Police is sufficient?

[slug]

Originally Posted by Chris T

Indeed you didn't - it's a parody intended to help make a point about a particular mindset. Sorry if I wasn't clear enough.

However your belief that the case is 'very close' to being resolved further illustrates my point. If the parents are even charged, the case will not be resolved until they are convicted in court. That would not be for some considerable time yet.

I take it, however, that for you, simply an accusation by the Police is sufficient?

No, a police accusation is not enough for me.
The McCann's behaviour from the out set has been suspicious in my opinion.

[Osem]

Originally Posted by slug

No, a police accusation is not enough for me.
The McCann's behaviour from the out set has been suspicious in my opinion.

I think a lot of that could stem from the fact that they feel very guilty at having left their children and may have done so for longer periods than was initially claimed.