Pleepsie Posted October 26, 2007 Author Report Share Posted October 26, 2007 I disagree, I think she's looked incredibly worn actually. Yes, but only in the last month. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnglishinScotland Posted October 26, 2007 Report Share Posted October 26, 2007 Again your only defense is to attack the person you dont agree with instead of their arguement. I had no intrest in returning here until your request so grow up and give over with your petty attempts to make me the villain here.. Well correct me if I'm wrong, but you are hurling about some pretty unpleasant things about this couple. Not the kind of thing one should say without sufficient evidence. What happened to innocent until proven guilty? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KOYAANISQATSI Posted October 26, 2007 Report Share Posted October 26, 2007 The onus is on you to prove how they did it. How they killed their child, then managed to convince the friends they were holidaying with that they'd lost her, friends who can probably testify to when they had last seen Madeleine, then managed to dispose of the body unnoticed whilst being under media scrutiny.....?Well the "Onus" or burden or legal obligation if you will, is between them and the law, the rest of your points were covered on thread before you signed up "GO CHECK". I cant be ersed going over it all again for your benefit.Believe what you please, for the meantime I am happy to agree to disagree with whatever you got until more unfolds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fifi Posted October 26, 2007 Report Share Posted October 26, 2007 As an aside if someone appears to want to believe the worst about them with no evidence, I think that reflects badly on that person. There are perhaps some issues with envy of the McCanns going on there I think.Aren't forums fun? Some posts tell you more about the poster than the subject they're posting about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnglishinScotland Posted October 26, 2007 Report Share Posted October 26, 2007 Aren't forums fun? Some posts tell you more about the poster than the subject they're posting about. Well that wasn't meant as a personal thing against KD, though he took it to be. Was more of a general comment. But nonetheless, maybe you're right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KOYAANISQATSI Posted October 26, 2007 Report Share Posted October 26, 2007 I'd be interested for your thoughts.But then:you are hurling about some pretty unpleasant things about this couple. Not the kind of thing one should say You asked, you got.No pleasing some folk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnglishinScotland Posted October 26, 2007 Report Share Posted October 26, 2007 ^You cut the end of that quote. Selective editing eh? I'm off to bed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pooks Posted October 27, 2007 Report Share Posted October 27, 2007 Just a little reminder to all users that Shetlink has a wonderful function called 'Private Messaging (PM)'. I would recommend using it when a conversation turns two way rather than remaining a group discussion. Back to the topic. I am still in two minds about whether or not the parents are telling the whole truth or hiding something. The first time I saw them on television my gut instinct was that they looked shady. As has already been mentioned, this is perhaps the way that they deal with a highly traumatic experience. At the end of the day, whether they had innocently/deliberately killed their daughter or that their daughter has been taken from them without their knowledge, most people would have shown signs of cracking by now. The fact that they haven't confirms that they are perhaps a couple that are very emotionless under stress. One thing that has got me wondering lately was the news today that said the Police have released a photofit of a man that a friend of the Mcann's said they had seen carrying the child away on the night in question. Why has this not been released before now? Has the person only just come forward? If so, why? Have the police been holding on to this information? Again, why? It struck me as a little peculiar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnglishinScotland Posted October 27, 2007 Report Share Posted October 27, 2007 The fact that they haven't confirms that they are perhaps a couple that are very emotionless under stress.. Gerry has walked out of two interviews I believe, Kate looks very worn and has been photographed in tears. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KOYAANISQATSI Posted October 27, 2007 Report Share Posted October 27, 2007 the news today that said the Police have released a photofit of a man that a friend of the Mcann's said they had seen carrying the child away on the night in question. Why has this not been released before now? Has the person only just come forward? If so, why? Have the police been holding on to this information? Again, why? It struck me as a little peculiar. The man with no face sketch came straight from team Mccann, not the cops. On Friday, the McCanns released a sketch of a man they believe could have abducted Madeleine from the holiday apartment in Praia da LuzJane Tanner the good pal of Kate and Gerry was the one who claimed to have seen him. It is the upgrade from the head sketch they put out previously that looked like an egg with hair.http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/44198000/jpg/_44198956_sketch_300.jpghttp://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/04_03/EfitPortugalPA_468x574.jpgThe McCanns' used the interview to launch their new confidential hotline to appeal for fresh information about Madeleine's disappearance. Family spokesman Clarence Mitchell said the phone line, manned by detectives and supported by Portugal police, had already drawn a "very good response". a Spanish TV phone poll published in Britain on Friday showed that 70 percent of viewers believed the McCanns were not telling the truth, while 30 percent said the couple were honest about what happened to their daughter. P.S Please no coughing fits over the "Daily Mail" link to the pic, I just used it cause it was a bigger version of the egg man drawing. P.P.S The detectives that Clarence mentions manning the hot line are the McCann's own private ones and nothing to do with the cops either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnglishinScotland Posted October 27, 2007 Report Share Posted October 27, 2007 the news today that said the Police have released a photofit of a man that a friend of the Mcann's said they had seen carrying the child away on the night in question. Why has this not been released before now? Has the person only just come forward? If so, why? Have the police been holding on to this information? Again, why? It struck me as a little peculiar. I will admit that that particular piece of info is quite unusual. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustMe Posted October 27, 2007 Report Share Posted October 27, 2007 Until I get some satisfactory explanation for the use of "they" in "they have taken her" as opposed to the more logical "someone has taken her" or the simple "Maddies not there" I have suspicions that there is something the parents know about the "abduction" that the media does not know. Maybe some threat received but perhaps something worse such as the mysterious "they" removing a body. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KOYAANISQATSI Posted October 27, 2007 Report Share Posted October 27, 2007 The release of the images, commissioned by private detectives working for the McCanns, was given the "tacit approval" of Portuguese police, Mr Mitchell said.http://www.guardian.co.uk/crime/article/0,,2199701,00.html TACIT:"expressed or carried on without words or speech" Certainly an unusual choice of words since the release of the image had nothing to do with the police, although they did flash the egg head sketch around the area previously.Also unusual is how Jane Tanner knew the colour of the mans shoes, jacket and trousers but didn't notice it was Madeleine he was carrying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KOYAANISQATSI Posted October 27, 2007 Report Share Posted October 27, 2007 Jose Cabrera analysed the couple’s television interview on Wednesday for the Portuguese newspaper Correio da Manha. He is billed therein as a “forensic psychiatrist and facial expression specialistâ€.He says: “Kate’s face does not express any emotion whatsoever or feeling. When people cry they move the muscles in their face, and she didn’t move one single muscle, just like a poker player. That is significantâ€And: “Her performance brings us the certainty that she is hiding something. The interview was non-spontaneous and it gives us the impression that it was a pose staged by the couple.†He tells the newspaper Correio da Manha: “Any Englishman is cold, but she has something else – her personality is not normal†Clarence Mitchell says: “A few days ago Kate was criticised for not showing enough emotion and then when she does cry she is criticised too. Everything that Kate and Gerry said on that interview was totally genuine. They have nothing to hide. The people who are making these allegations should be very sure about what they are saying. Our lawyers are watching the media coverage very carefully in both Portugal and Britain and action will be taken against anything we feel has gone too farâ€http://www.anorak.co.uk/madeleine-mccann/177198.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Talpa Posted October 27, 2007 Report Share Posted October 27, 2007 Why should anyone splurge their emotions all over the media? Culturally in Shetland, Scotland and the UK, funerals, for example, are very restrained affairs. There is perhaps some sniffling into tissues but compared to other countries where the culture is to wail and scream over the body we tend to hold it in, in public at least. Maybe we are too anal and perhaps we're changing, see daytime TV, Jeremy Kyle etc. we're 'opening up', confessing, splattering emotions. Some lap that up, some cringe. A lot are confused... apparently, it's even acceptable for men to cry now... The father of the one of the children killed recently on a motorway spoke on TV the day afterwards. He was composed, strangely so. He said 'dead' and 'killed' (with reference his own son) without a flicker. Folk deal with trauma in their own way, often by becoming completely rational. Shock numbs. It's evolutionary purpose perhaps being to allow humans to continue to function (and survive?) in the face of fear or trauma? The divide between the restained and the not so was exposed when Diana died. There were those who brayed for emotion, the masses flocking to London for communal tears and gnashing of teeth and those who found the whole thing grotesque. In the dark of the night a person could be wailing like the best of them. Do we want a live 24 hour emotion-cam in the Mcanns house... ? then we'd have media proof. This comment isn't about the guilt or otherwise of the parents. But, judging them by their TV emotions or lack of them is unreliable to say the least. There are massive issues about the difference between this happening to a white, middle class, media-savvy family as opposed to some 'other' but is the anwser that they should shut up and behave appropriately? Anyway, how the dickens would any of us know whether we'd function or wail on TV unless, whatever it is that has happened, happens to us... I don't know, I'm going to go and weep into my webcam... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now