Madeleine McCann

If your a demonstration of intellect then ignorance is preferable. how you can say that any parent is worse then another defeats what your saying. If it is just profession that stops you thinking the worst then your opinion of parenting isn't that high.

[peanut]

Originally Posted by Damien

Relax everyone. Your all going crazy, there is no need to get angry at each other. If people want to blame the parents let them, and same for those who are defending them. It's not going to hurt the feeling of anymore nor effect the case. Everyone is too emotional about this story now.

You might find little evidence of people accusing them that they DID do the dirty deed here.

What people are getting confused with here is that there are those that say they are innocent full stop, and there is those that have an open mind. I'm struggling to find those that say they DID actually harm maddie with the same conviction of those that say they are innocent.

The most conflictual point is just that, how can people be so sure to the point they will say they are innocent as in 'that IS fact'.

I agree that they are innocent till proven guilty on the harming of maddie in whatever way that harm was meant to have been caused. Presumption of innocence is one of the cornerstones of our legal system and should always be the position people take. I have read some things on other forums that make this one seem like a tea party chat and i do not agree with it.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by RizzyKing

If your a demonstration of intellect then ignorance is preferable. how you can say that any parent is worse then another defeats what your saying. If it is just profession that stops you thinking the worst then your opinion of parenting isn't that high.

and being prejudiced towards a class of people is what exactlly? thoughtful intelligent? reasonable? none of the above

Profiling.......................

Ever heard of it?

Police use it all the time.

Shout me down all you want but my point was at the begining was that a family of two middle class GPs and 3 kids does not in my opinion fit into a profile where they would be neglectful to them and/or even kill them.

It's a generalisation, but that's what profiling is. Sure there can and will be exceptions.

But it's a valid point, so you can all calm down now.

who do you think the biggest crooks in society are? the poor? or those who constantly fiddle the tax or corruption in business? what do you think costs the taxplayer most? the poor or the rich fiddlers?corruption knows no class

I am guessing there are less incidents involving corruption than petty theft, shop-lifting, muggings etc. Although I would suspect that corruption costs even more to the population. Either way, the former does not lead to other crimes and anti-social behavior in the way poverty in inner-city estates do.

I also hope your not saying you have to have money to be a good parent there

No, I am saying that poverty can led to situations in which crime is more common. As well as that in such environments their are additional strains on the parents, especially if they are single mothers (a group more likely to find themselves in poverty as well).

[mrmistoffelees]

Originally Posted by Pierre

Profiling.......................

Ever heard of it?

Police use it all the time.

Shout me down all you want but my point was at the begining was that a family of two middle class GPs and 3 kids does not in my opinion fit into a profile where they would be neglectful to them and/or even kill them.

It's a generalisation, but that's what profiling is. Sure there can and will be exceptions.

But it's a valid point, so you can all calm down now.

Out of interest can you tell me what profiling is and also how it works and perhaps more importantly how it used by the Police ?

Shout me down all you want but my point was at the begining was that a family of two middle class GPs and 3 kids does not in my opinion fit into a profile where they would be neglectful to them and/or even kill them.

I do disagree with this however, I do not think there is a profile for people who are more likely kill their own children.

[peanut]

I'm struggling to find anywhere where it states they killed maddie.

But it's plausible that they accidently killed maddie. Do they fit that 'profile'??

I seriously doubt the police would start any investigation of a missing child by seeing if they were from a council estate or whether the parent\parents were not professional. As i understand it profiling would come into it after the initial stage of investigation where as your belief would have them looking at profession first and working down from there. You just have no idea how offensive you have been to millions of people in this country do you and also while your talking about justice for the mc'canns you did a great injustice to those millions of people.

[Saaf_laandon_mo]

Originally Posted by Pierre

You cannot say for certain, of course not, but you can make a judgement about someones character based on how they present themselves, their profession etc,etc

How many times did they leave the kids alone???

You'd find that from what the McCann family have to say, its more than once.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/liv...n_page_id=1770

To date I have not heard anything that condradicts this and I have seen family members on the news saying it was not a one off. Im positive the parents have alos said that it was not a one off.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Damien

I do disagree with this however, I do not think there is a profile for people who are nire likely kill their own children.

Ok, fair enough on that one.

---------- Post added at 13:08 ---------- Previous post was at 13:07 ----------

Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees

Out of interest can you tell me what profiling is and also how it works and perhaps more importantly how it used by the Police ?

You're a clever boy, look it up.

You weren't asking me, because you already know the answer and want to trip me up............. were you?

---------- Post added at 13:11 ---------- Previous post was at 13:08 ----------

Originally Posted by Saaf_laandon_mo

You'd find that from what the McCann family have to say, its more than once.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/liv...n_page_id=1770

To date I have not heard anything that condradicts this and I have seen family members on the news saying it was not a one off. Im positive the parents have alos said that it was not a one off.

Fair enough more than once........twice?...........Three times?

I was originall objecting this statement by Ritzy thingy

A bad decision is a one off this wasn't a one off it was every night they were on holiday.

Originally Posted by Pierre

Fair enough more than once........twice?...........Three times?

I was originall objecting this statement by Ritzy thingy

It does not matter what anyone says leaving a 3 year old and two 2 years alone in an apartment while you go out for a meal whether 200 yards away or in the next town is just plain wrong and it is neglect whether done daily or just once its just not on full stop.

[Saaf_laandon_mo]

Originally Posted by Pierre

Ok, fair enough on that one.

---------- Post added at 13:08 ---------- Previous post was at 13:07 ----------



You're a clever boy, look it up.

You weren't asking me, because you already know the answer and want to trip me up............. were you?

---------- Post added at 13:11 ---------- Previous post was at 13:08 ----------



Fair enough more than once........twice?...........Three times?

I was originall objecting this statement by Ritzy thingy

If you read that article carefully you'll see that it was every night (as stated by Patricia McCann - a sister).

Further more....
Relatives of the couple revealed that the McCanns and three other couples on holiday with them, all doctors, tucked their children into bed each night and walked the 40 yards from their apartments at the Ocean Club run by British tour operators, Mark Warner in Praia da Luz on the Algarve to a poolside tapas bar.

[mrmistoffelees]

Originally Posted by Pierre

<snip>



You're a clever boy, look it up.

You weren't asking me, because you already know the answer and want to trip me up............. were you?

<more snippyness>

Maybe I was and do. But then perhaps there are may be others on this thread who do not, so therefore my question(s) still stand

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by RizzyKing

I seriously doubt the police would start any investigation of a missing child by seeing if they were from a council estate or whether the parent\parents were not professional. As i understand it profiling would come into it after the initial stage of investigation where as your belief would have them looking at profession first and working down from there.

I have not said that the police would be using profiling in this case.

My point was that In my opinion, no one elses. That I do not think that they come from the kind of background to willfully neglect their children - That is all.

You just have no idea how offensive you have been to millions of people in this country

I'm sure they'll get over it, and unless the amount of people who read this board has increased dramatically I'll doubt they ever read it to be offended.

do you and also while your talking about justice for the mc'canns you did a great injustice to those millions of people.

Fortunately, I', sure all of these millions of people will sleep soundly tonight in blissful ignorance of my comments.

---------- Post added at 13:19 ---------- Previous post was at 13:16 ----------

Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees

Maybe I was and do. But then perhaps there are may be others on this thread who do not, so therefore my question(s) still stand

Well it's irrelevant anyway, as my point was not that the police would be using profiling in this instance - maybe they will, maybe they wont.

I was just using the example to explain from where I was basing my gut instincts, i.e. they don't into my profile, that's all.