Legally McCanns WERE responsible parents! update MAIL.

Madeleine Beth McCann went missing from PDL in Portugal on the 3rd May 2007, there are so many unanswered questions, please discuss

Re: Legally McCanns WERE responsible parents! update MAIL.

Postby clear » Fri May 30, 2008 5:00 am

What about the mccanns turning down the offer of a free babysitting service? Was that within the bounds of responsible parenting?
clear
You're Nicked
 
Posts: 217
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2008 11:18 am

Re: Legally McCanns WERE responsible parents! update MAIL.

Postby weissnicht » Fri May 30, 2008 5:02 am

Tigger,
I noticed that too when I was reading the Mail. :shock: :shock: :shock:
Some journalist :roll:
"We have not cooperated in any shape or form"
Clarence Mitchell
User avatar
weissnicht
Mafia Boss
 
Posts: 2254
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 5:18 pm

Re: Legally McCanns WERE responsible parents! update MAIL.

Postby dogrose » Fri May 30, 2008 5:56 am

legally responsible? perhaps they have found a lawyer or two who can argue that is the case. but the fact that the PJ are persuing charges of neglect, if we are to believe the press, would mean that might not be the case.

in the real world it was not responsible.
User avatar
dogrose
On Parole
 
Posts: 1312
Joined: Sun Nov 25, 2007 11:47 am

Re: Legally McCanns WERE responsible parents! update MAIL.

Postby nhsdog » Fri May 30, 2008 6:15 am

Perhaps they should get Ma Healy as an expert witness.....and deliver the punishment.....a 'good shaking'.
nhsdog
Suspect
 
Posts: 146
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 10:55 pm

Re: Legally McCanns WERE responsible parents! update MAIL.

Postby metodomom » Fri May 30, 2008 6:18 am

I think the PJ should have pursued charges from the beginning. I don't know if at this stage of the game you can successfully prosecute.
It was irresponsible parenting - no doubt about that.
Faith and doubt both are needed - not as antagonists, but working side by side to take us around the unknown curve.
Lillian Smith
User avatar
metodomom
New In Town
 
Posts: 42
Joined: Sun May 04, 2008 6:19 pm

Re: Legally McCanns WERE responsible parents! update MAIL.

Postby Arbiter » Fri May 30, 2008 6:18 am

redsquare wrote:=The big question is: Have the PJ got enough solid evidence to prove they either didn't check at all or not as often as they have claimed?

Have they got CCTV evidence?


If they got dragged back from Chaplins then they are in the deep doo-doo.
User avatar
Arbiter
On Parole
 
Posts: 1119
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 9:50 pm

Re: Legally McCanns WERE responsible parents! update MAIL.

Postby paralipsis » Fri May 30, 2008 6:20 am

'If there is any suggestion of neglect charges being considered that will be vigorously denied because the legal advice that Kate and Gerry have received both in Portugal and Britain is that legally speaking everything they were doing that week was well within the bounds of responsible parenting.'

Legal advice can on occasion be of poor quality. Its quality can be influenced by the facts given to the lawyers who offered the advice. In this case, good lawyers may have provided advice without knowing the full facts of the case.

Recently, several key facts have come to light about the events surrounding the disappearance of Madeleine McCann. In particular, the parenting of the McCanns has been questioned in official documents. Did the lawyers who provided the McCanns with legal advice know of the relevant information contained in these documents at the time they gave their advice?
User avatar
paralipsis
Been Cautioned
 
Posts: 368
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2008 12:35 am

Re: Legally McCanns WERE responsible parents! update MAIL.

Postby JimTommo » Fri May 30, 2008 7:37 am

redsquare wrote:They will argue that even if the MW baby-listening service HAD been available in PDL it would still not have stopped an abductor striking between rounds/checks.


Interesting. Kate has said she wished MW had offered a listening service. That mightn't have helped the McCanns (or poor Margaret of course) except perhaps for having somebody else to blame.
"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it." - George Bernard Shaw

"JimTommo is NOT a uSER OF Grape Juice PLUS"
JimTommo
You're Nicked
 
Posts: 250
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 6:43 pm

Re: Legally McCanns WERE responsible parents! update MAIL.

Postby tylersmum » Fri May 30, 2008 7:48 am

dogrose wrote:legally responsible? perhaps they have found a lawyer or two who can argue that is the case. but the fact that the PJ are persuing charges of neglect, if we are to believe the press, would mean that might not be the case.

in the real world it was not responsible.

The important question is why is the Mail impying that the prosecutor is pursuing a charge of neglect?
The court ruling mentions homicide,neglect ,concealing a body even abduction so why are the papers making it seem that neglect is the aim of the Portuguese.
Usually the papers would have picked up the "abduction" to show that the case against the McCanns was failing and that the PJ were going back to a predator abduction but they haven't .WHY?
tylersmum
Mafia Boss
 
Posts: 2590
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 11:55 am

Re: Legally McCanns WERE responsible parents! update MAIL.

Postby lunalovegood » Fri May 30, 2008 7:50 am

the thing that leapt out at me ( seeing the paper copy this morning) was the big deal about the 'neglect' charge, conveneinetly burying the coprse concealment and homicide) - so Clarrie has managed to obfuscate that and make the negelct the issue. Why not massive headlines saying the McScum could be up for those charges? Had they been innocent, you would expect total bewilderment at the assumption of her death and cries for the police to explain why there was a corpse to conceal...
lunalovegood
New In Town
 
Posts: 78
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2007 5:43 pm

Re: Legally McCanns WERE responsible parents! update MAIL.

Postby Leaser » Fri May 30, 2008 7:52 am

This is an obvious typo - should read

"legally Mccanns were the responsible parents. :mrgreen:
Unfortunately democracy cannot function without a free press

I doubt we will see ...... Justice for Madeline
Leaser
On Parole
 
Posts: 1200
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2008 12:05 pm

Re: Legally McCanns WERE responsible parents! update MAIL.

Postby mexx » Fri May 30, 2008 7:52 am

clear wrote:What about the mccanns turning down the offer of a free babysitting service? Was that within the bounds of responsible parenting?



In early reports, it was said that staff had offered them their walkie-talkies to leave in the room, as substitute for a baby monitor, but McCanns rejected that too.
mexx
On Parole
 
Posts: 1227
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 11:22 pm

Re: Legally McCanns WERE responsible parents! update MAIL.

Postby magnalady » Fri May 30, 2008 7:59 am

How can they argue they were responsible , they left the doors unlocked! If they had accepted the baby listening service provided by the holiday company, they would not have to leave the door unlocked..beggers belief and a load of legal Tosh :evil:
magnalady
Suspect
 
Posts: 137
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 9:16 pm

Re: Legally McCanns WERE responsible parents! update MAIL.

Postby lindy » Fri May 30, 2008 8:04 am

If the MCCANNS say we were doing the same checks that MW were offering, I'm sure that MW don't say to parent's we will check your kid's for you just leave a door open. They would have 1) just listened from outside for crying 2) had a key to get in. And they only do check's like that on gated complex's. IMO they talk s***e. RESPONSIBLE PARENT'S NEVER!!!!!!! make's a mockery of all responsible parent's :evil: :evil:
lindy
New In Town
 
Posts: 41
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2008 7:25 pm

Re: Legally McCanns WERE responsible parents! update MAIL.

Postby Sprite » Fri May 30, 2008 8:09 am

TimH wrote:I'm with beachy...tell it to the judge, Clarrie. The Court of Public Opinion has ruled against you.


Im with Beachy too.
I really cant see the Portuguese Judicial system endorsing the McCanns idea of 'responsible parenting'
And I bet Mr Caplin cant either.
Sprite
New In Town
 
Posts: 20
Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 6:00 am

PreviousNext

Return to Justice for Madeleine

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests