Madeleine McCann

kanadams123 · 05-06-2020 02:21PM

retro:electro wrote: »

I think one of my favourite theories is that they found her dead and hid her body because they didn’t want to lose their jobs as Doctors, even though Kate hasn’t worked a day in her position since.

Why bring this up? Your giving out to the people who put out such theories (as ludicrous as most of them may be).
Why bring one up yourself? Quite hypocritical of you to be quite honest.

SlowBlowin · 05-06-2020 02:24PM

retro:electro wrote: »

Both as bad as each other? Absolutely not. How does saying I don’t think two parents killed their child as bad as saying they did? There is no evidence to suggest they had any involvement in her disappearance, which is why many people are reluctant to lay the blame on two grieving people.

In all my years on these threads I’ve never read one reasonable account of how they could have managed to do it, any kind of believable version of events or a credible timeline. I’ve read nothing only fantasy, exaggeration, filling in the blanks and waffle. If something credible was to come to light that indicated they were involved, then I would be all ears. But nothing has. So no, I don’t believe that people who fail to see how two parents could have killed their child or covered up her death and carried the charade for thirteen years without a shred of proof are “just as bad” as those who do badly want it to be true they have dreamt up a narrative and stick to it at all costs.

My father was murdered in 2006, there was lots of speculation on a family level (and in the national press), some totally wrong and some totally right.

It was found in high court that a family member was guilty of murder, a person was sentenced to life (they have been released now), but they still proclaim their innocence.

You obviously have an opinion, which is valid, but just because you fail to see something to convince you otherwise does not mean your opinion is anything more than an opinion. As I said, without proof everyone's opinion is just an opinion, including yours.

My comment was based on personal experience, and its my "opinion" that unless you 100% know the real facts of the case you should recognise that your thoughts are just an opinion..

retro:electro · 05-06-2020 02:24PM

kanadams123 wrote: »

Why bring this up? Your giving out to the people who put out such theories (as ludicrous as most of them may be).
Why bring one up yourself? Quite hypocritical of you to be quite honest.

How is it “hypocritical” of me to poke a hole in something that is so often trotted out as a theory and repeated ad nauseam? I don’t need your permission to bring something up on a thread dedicated to the topic.

retro:electro · 05-06-2020 02:32PM

SlowBlowin wrote: »

My father was murdered in 2006, there was lots of speculation on a family level (and in the national press), some totally wrong and some totally right.

It was found in high court that a family member was guilty of murder, a person was sentenced to life (they have been released now), but they still proclaim their innocence.

You obviously have an opinion, which is valid, but just because you fail to see something to convince you otherwise does not mean your opinion is anything more than an opinion. As I said, without proof everyone's opinion is just an opinion, including yours.

My comment was based on personal experience, and its my "opinion" that unless you 100% know the real facts of the case you should recognise that your thoughts are just an opinion..

I’m sorry but I’m not sure what your personal case has to do with anything. Maybe you’re letting that interfere with your perception on this case? None of us know the facts of this case, that is the whole point. So in the absence of anything, why even speculate that the parents were involved? Why write awful things down on the internet and imply they had a hand in her disappearance, where their other two children who are now teenagers can one day read every brain fart from total randomers.

Having an opinion on the case is one thing, writing hateful lies and vicious tripe without a shred of proof to back it up is shameful and should be called out at every opportunity. In your case, there was a trial and someone was found guilty. In this case, there hasn’t been. That’s the key difference but it doesn’t stop the amateur sleuths from mud slinging and posting opinion as fact.

kanadams123 · 05-06-2020 02:38PM

retro:electro wrote: »

How is it “hypocritical” of me to poke a hole in something that is so often trotted out as a theory and repeated ad nauseam? I don’t need your permission to bring something up on a thread dedicated to the topic.

I just find it hypocritical that those who give out about people writing all these nasty things about Kate and Gerry feel it's ok for themselves to bring up nasty thinks about them. You may not be saying they killed her, but you (and Susie Blue) are bringing up nasty theories yourself that weren't mentioned on this particular thread before.
I'm not saying your not aloud do this. It's a discussion thread after all...but by bringing it up do you want someone to discuss that theory with you..just so you can tell them they are wrong? Hence your bringing out the people you keep shutting down?

I don't think Kate and Gerry had any involvement (I'll be honest and say about 13years ago, I may have thought it was a possibility...due to all the press etc. at the time) But since reading into the actual facts the last 12/13 years, I don't see how it's plausible.
I really hope this lead on the German Man gives some closure to the parents.

splinter65 · 05-06-2020 02:42PM

SusieBlue wrote: »

My personal favourite was that Kate & Gerry found the terrible twos/threes to be very difficult with Madeleine, she needed a lot of attention and they were sick of it, they loved the twins more than her and they wanted her gone.
So they had arranged to sell her for quite a sum of money to a gang of pedophiles before they ever arrived to Portugal and pretended she was kidnapped to cover it up. And their friends all helped with this so they wouldn’t get the blame.

It’s almost as bad as the one where Kate was secretly a devil worshipper and murdered and tortured Madeleine to death as sacrifice to the devil.

Someone actually offered these up as legitimate, reasonable theories as to how Madeleine came to be missing. It’s mind blowing.

No no no. There was the theory that she was accidentally killed and Gerry just by luck found a dead dog, brought it back to the flat cut it open stuffed the child in to the dogs body, took the dog and threw it into a volcano.

retro:electro · 05-06-2020 02:46PM

kanadams123 wrote: »

I just find it hypocritical that those who give out about people writing all these nasty things about Kate and Gerry feel it's ok for themselves to bring up nasty thinks about them. You may not be saying they killed her, but you (and Susie Blue) are bringing up nasty theories yourself that weren't mentioned on this particular thread before.
I'm not saying your not aloud do this. It's a discussion thread after all...but by bringing it up do you want someone to discuss that theory with you..just so you can tell them they are wrong? Hence your bringing out the people you keep shutting down?

I don't think Kate and Gerry had any involvement (I'll be honest and say about 13years ago, I may have thought it was a possibility...due to all the press etc. at the time) But since reading into the actual facts the last 12/13 years, I don't see how it's plausible.
I really hope this lead on the German Man gives some closure to the parents.

Sorry but this very theory was brought up in the first few pages of this thread.

ShineOn7 wrote: »

When they came home and found a deceased Madeleine they both knew the sleeping tablets in her system would be found in the autopsy. They also knew this marked the end of their careers as doctors and likely the end of custody of their other two kids

The amount of evidence out there about these parents is staggering and I believe one day, eventually, they'll face jailtime

In the meantime, they'll whirl their highly paid PR machine out once a year with nonsense like this latest German guy

As with everything from day one of this from Gerry and Kate McCann, it's all smoke and mirrors]

Apparently they knew this would mark the end of their careers. See that? Opinion so casually written there as fact. Sorry but it’s absolute bull**** and deserves to be called out and ridiculed at any opportunity.

kanadams123 · 05-06-2020 02:51PM

retro:electro wrote: »

Sorry but this very theory was brought up in the first few pages of this thread.

Apparently they knew this would mark the end of their careers. See that? Option so casually written there as fact. Sorry but it’s absolute bull**** and deserves to be called out and ridiculed at any opportunity.

Sorry. I must have missed this particular post. And I agree it should have been called out. I thought you were the first to bring it up. My mistake.

I do stand by what I said about Suzie Blues comment though. Unless it was previously mentioned in the thread that Kate was the "devil worshipper"

splinter65 · 05-06-2020 02:52PM

kanadams123 wrote: »

Sorry. I must have missed this particular post. And I agree it should have been called out. I thought you were the first to bring it up. My mistake.

I do stand by what I said about Suzie Blues comment though. Unless it was previously mentioned in the thread that Kate was the devil.

Dozens of opinions on this thread presented not only as proven facts, but as evidence.

retro:electro · 05-06-2020 02:54PM

kanadams123 wrote: »

Sorry. I must have missed this particular post. And I agree it should have been called out. I thought you were the first to bring it up. My mistake.

I do stand by what I said about Suzie Blues comment though. Unless it was previously mentioned in the thread that Kate was the devil.

There’s been a myriad of Madeleine threads on boards over the years, and they always attract the same cohort of posters, myself included there. There was a thread running in the True Crime forum last year and those were some of the theories people trotted out so casually. Those same posters are still posting here today. People have wild imaginations that should be put to better use.

y0ssar1an22 · 05-06-2020 02:54PM

this new fella, was he a suspect back in the day?

SlowBlowin · 05-06-2020 02:54PM

retro:electro wrote: »

I’m sorry but I’m not sure what your personal case has to do with anything. Maybe you’re letting that interfere with your perception on this case? None of us know the facts of this case, that is the whole point. So in the absence of anything, why even speculate that the parents were involved? Why write awful things down on the internet and imply they had a hand in her disappearance, where their other two children who are now teenagers can one day read every brain fart from total randomers.

Having an opinion on the case is one thing, writing hateful lies and vicious tripe without a shred of proof to back it up is shameful and should be called out at every opportunity. In your case, there was a trial and someone was found guilty. In this case, there hasn’t been. That’s the key difference but it doesn’t stop the amateur sleuths from mud slinging and posting opinion as fact.

My personal case has shown me that when opinions are toted as something more is damaging for the family and the case. The opinions that were touted as fact in my case happened pre-trial, so no difference.

You now attack me saying my perception is wrong because of my experience, I guess thats your opinion. I prefer to take the stance that everything is a possibility until the facts are established, and my comment, that you disagree with, is simply that opinions should not be touted as facts, including yours. It was a neutral comment, I am sorry it upsets you so much.

y0ssar1an22 · 05-06-2020 02:56PM

retro:electro wrote: »

There’s been a myriad of Madeleine threads on boards over the years, and they always attract the same cohort of posters, myself included there. There was a thread running in the True Crime forum last year and those were some of the theories people trotted out so casually. Those same posters are still posting here today. People have wild imaginations that should be put to better use.

thats the nauture of unsolved crimes. People theorise about what may have happened. whats the problem with that?

kanadams123 · 05-06-2020 02:59PM

splinter65 wrote: »

Dozens of opinions on this thread presented not only as proven facts, but as evidence.

quote="retro:electro;113648629"] Why write awful things down on the internet and imply they had a hand in her disappearance, where their other two children who are now teenagers can one day read every brain fart from total randomers.[/quote]

I agree 100% with retro:electro in what is said here.
This is my point. Although you and Susie Blue aren't the conspiracy theorists to initially come up with these ludicrous theories...ye were the ones who brought them up on this particular thread for others to read.

I hadn't read the theory about Kate being a devil worshipper before. Yet it's now on this thread for others to discuss. Also your one about the volcano?
Ludicrous of course, I agree with ye both on this. TBH Any theory that Kate and Gerry had involvement, I would find very hard to beleive. It's just not credible.

retro:electro · 05-06-2020 03:00PM

SlowBlowin wrote: »

My personal case has shown me that when opinions are toted as something more is damaging for the family and the case. The opinions that were touted as fact in my case happened pre-trial, so no difference.

You now attack me saying my perception is wrong because of my experience, I guess thats your opinion. I prefer to take the stance that everything is a possibility until the facts are established, and my comment, that you disagree with, is simply that opinions should not be touted as facts, including yours. It was a neutral comment, I am sorry it upsets you so much.

My opinion is I don’t know what happened. My opinion isn’t damaging to anything or anyone because I’m not accusing anyone of anything. I don’t know what happened. In the absence of any evidence I assume she was taken but I don’t know? If something substantial comes to light about the parents I would be interested but unless that day occurs I will not blame them or say they are involved. I’m sorry but maybe you need to read your first line over again and direct it at those who truly need to read it, those who not only present opinion as fact but as proof that they were involved. You seem slightly confused.

kanadams123 · 05-06-2020 03:01PM

retro:electro wrote: »

There’s been a myriad of Madeleine threads on boards over the years, and they always attract the same cohort of posters, myself included there. There was a thread running in the True Crime forum last year and those were some of the theories people trotted out so casually. Those same posters are still posting here today. People have wild imaginations that should be put to better use.

Another thread ðŸ˜® . I thinks it's best I keep away from that one if it's as bad as you are saying!!

TheW1zard · 05-06-2020 03:04PM

retro:electro wrote: »

My opinion is I don’t know what happened. My opinion isn’t damaging to anything or anyone because I’m not accusing anyone of anything. I don’t know what happened. In the absence of any evidence I assume she was taken but I don’t know? If something substantial comes to light about the parents I would be interested but unless that day occurs I will not blame them or say they are involved. I’m sorry but maybe you need to read your first line over again and direct it at those who truly need to read it, those who not only present opinion as fact but as proof that they were involved. You seem slightly confused.

The most fluffy, on the fence, no opinion, garbage Ive read on boards.ie. Thats takes some doing. Youre contributing absolutely nothing.
Maybe no one killed her and She just ran away :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

SlowBlowin · 05-06-2020 03:04PM

retro:electro wrote: »

You seem slightly confused.

No confusion, I said speculation presented as fact, on both sides of the argument was bad.

You disagreed, re-read your reply.

retro:electro · 05-06-2020 03:07PM

SlowBlowin wrote: »

No confusion, I said speculation presented as fact, on both sides of the argument was bad.

You disagreed, re-read your reply.

I disagree with you saying those don’t blame the parents are “as bad” as those who. That’s just a ridiculous thing to say.

retro:electro · 05-06-2020 03:10PM

TheW1zard wrote: »

The most fluffy, on the fence, no opinion, garbage Ive read on boards.ie. Thats takes some doing. Youre contributing absolutely nothing.
Maybe no one killed her and She just ran away :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

Wow 15 eye rolls. That’s me told. Weren’t you asked on another thread for this “forensic evidence” that proves they did it? Have you even found out what a resort is yet?

SlowBlowin · 05-06-2020 03:15PM

retro:electro wrote: »

I disagree with you saying those don’t blame the parents are “as bad” as those who. That’s just a ridiculous thing to say.

Ok, so everyone is equal, but some are more equal than others, got it...

SlowBlowin · 05-06-2020 03:18PM

retro:electro wrote: »

I disagree with you saying those don’t blame the parents are “as bad” as those who. That’s just a ridiculous thing to say.

I will say it one last time for you.

People you represent their opinions as facts are wrong to do so.

Do you disagree with this point ???? Yes or No ?

retro:electro · 05-06-2020 03:23PM

SlowBlowin wrote: »

I will say it one last time for you.

People you represent their opinions as facts are wrong to do so.

Do you disagree with this point ???? Yes or No ?

Yes I agree but I’m not presenting my opinion as fact. I’m saying I don’t know what happened and I don’t see how they could have done it. Others are presenting theories, have a pattern of insinuating, provoking and dog whistling and are committed to making the parents look as questionable as possible at all costs. My opinion is I don’t know what happened, others is it’s the parents wot dunnit. One is damaging and the other is not. Surely you don’t need this explained to you, having been through it yourself.

SlowBlowin · 05-06-2020 03:25PM

retro:electro wrote: »

Yes I agree but I’m not presenting my opinion as fact. I’m saying I don’t know what happened and I don’t see how they could have done it. Others are presenting theories, have a pattern of insinuating, provoking and dog whistling and are committed to making the parents look as questionable as possible at all costs. My opinion is I don’t know what happened, others is it’s the parents wot dunnit. You are right that they are not equal and should not be seen as so because one is damaging and the other is not.

So why did you so passionately disagree with my original post, here it is for your convenience:

"This thread has degraded into utter rubbish.

Can we all agree, some people think they were involved in some way and others don't.

No one on boards has hard evidence either way. Plenty of people saying they did it, many others saying categorically they did not. Both are as bad as each other."

limnam · 05-06-2020 03:27PM

retro:electro wrote: »

Yes I agree but I’m not presenting my opinion as fact. I’m saying I don’t know what happened and I don’t see how they could have done it. Others are presenting theories, have a pattern of insinuating, provoking and dog whistling and are committed to making the parents look as questionable as possible at all costs. My opinion is I don’t know what happened, others is it’s the parents wot dunnit. One is damaging and the other is not. Surely you don’t need this explained to you, having been through it yourself.

Can I use your thanking argument here?

danslevent · 05-06-2020 03:28PM

People also seem to forget that the Mccanns went through IVF to conceive. Why would they go through that to murder their child?

limnam · 05-06-2020 03:30PM

danslevent wrote: »

People also seem to forget that the Mccanns went through IVF to conceive. Why would they go through that to murder their child?

I'd say it's fairly irrelevant.

E.g. If it was accidental. The fact they used IVF doesn't matter.

retro:electro · 05-06-2020 03:31PM

SlowBlowin wrote: »

So why did you so passionately disagree with my original post, here it is for your convenience:

"This thread has degraded into utter rubbish.

Can we all agree, some people think they were involved in some way and others don't.

No one on boards has hard evidence either way. Plenty of people saying they did it, many others saying categorically they did not. Both are as bad as each other."

Because one is severely damaging and the other is not. Where is the harm in disbelieving they were involved and then shown to be wrong? But it’s severely damaging to believe the opposite and spread vicious lies and peddle untruths. I also don’t really see people saying outright they did not do it. Many people use logic and rational and don’t see how they could have done it, but if something came to light that involved them then they would accept that. But nothing ever has. We are just going around in circles here, so best leave it at that.

SlowBlowin · 05-06-2020 03:40PM

retro:electro wrote: »

Because one is severely damaging and the other is not. Where is the harm in disbelieving they were involved and then shown to be wrong? But it’s severely damaging to believe the opposite and spread vicious lies and peddle untruths. I also don’t really see people saying outright they did not do it. Many people use logic and rational and don’t see how they could have done it, but if something came to light that involved them then they would accept that. But nothing ever has. We are just going around in circles here, so best leave it at that.

It was damaging to me when people said my father was not killed by a family member, and deep down I held a belief in fact she did do it ?

There is no difference, you are blinded by what you perceive is the right, good thing to do.

You were quick to brush off my experience as irreverent, its not, it helped me see both sides.

SlowBlowin · 05-06-2020 03:41PM

And for the record, I have no view on who did it in this case.

Madeleine McCann

Comments