Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Madeleine McCann

1…6566687071…170

Comments

  • #2012
    cnocbui
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,185 ✭✭✭✭cnocbui


    Plumbthedepths wrote: »
    No irony at all. It's simple logic that you don't leave young children alone while knocking back the wine with your mates 4 nights on the trot. I do accept equally bad stuff can happen to a child if the parents are home but the risk is greatly reduced.

    It's not simple logic at all. Prior to the Madeline McCann going missing, what were the comparable events that have occurred since, say, 1950?


  • #2013
    Plumbthedepths
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,653 ✭✭✭✭Plumbthedepths


    cnocbui wrote: »
    It's not simple logic at all. Prior to the Madeline McCann going missing, what were the comparable events that have occurred since, say, 1950?

    Sorry but if you wish to disappear down a rabbit hole you won't have me for company.
    But you don't think it's illogical to leave young children alone while you head off to drink with friends? Ok so.


  • #2014
    limnam
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,345 ✭✭✭limnam


    cnocbui wrote: »
    It's not simple logic at all. Prior to the Madeline McCann going missing, what were the comparable events that have occurred since, say, 1950?

    Almost sounds like you're condoning leaving 3 kids under 4 in an unlocked apartment while going out drinking

    Are you sure?


  • #2015
    volchitsa
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,019 ✭✭✭✭volchitsa


    cnocbui wrote: »
    It's not simple logic at all. Prior to the Madeline McCann going missing, what were the comparable events that have occurred since, say, 1950?

    You know that it's illegal to leave children under the age of 12 alone in Portugal?
    What does it matter what you or I think the risk is, it's against the law.

    Would people be on here defending a British person who had an traffic accident in Portugal if their defence was that they didn't know the Portuguese highway code and so were driving at UK speed limits or alcohol levels?

    Why is ignorance of the law acceptable for parenting and child minding?

    ”I enjoy cigars, whisky and facing down totalitarians, so am I really Winston Churchill?” (JK Rowling)



  • #2016
    cnocbui
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,185 ✭✭✭✭cnocbui


    limnam wrote: »
    Almost sounds like you're condoning leaving 3 kids under 4 in an unlocked apartment while going out drinking

    Are you sure?

    Yes, quite.
    volchitsa wrote: »
    You know that it's illegal to leave children under the age of 12 alone in Portugal?
    What does it matter what you or I think the risk is, it's against the law.

    Would people be on here defending a British person who had an traffic accident in Portugal if their defence was that they didn't know the Portuguese highway code and so were driving at UK speed limits or alcohol levels?

    Why is ignorance of the law acceptable for parenting and child minding?

    No, under Portugese law as it was at the time, the McCanns were not guilty of abandonment. The PJ in PDL certainly tried for that, but I guess the prosecutor told them that kite wouldn't fly. Apparently the apartments proximity to the tapas bar and their schedule of checking was more than sufficient to discount abandonment.


  • Advertisement
  • #2017
    limnam
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,345 ✭✭✭limnam


    cnocbui wrote: »
    Yes, quite.

    Ok.


    At least no one can roll out the "no is condoning what they did" anymore


  • #2018
    happyoutscan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,640 ✭✭✭happyoutscan


    TheW1zard wrote: »
    It definitely wasn't the McCanns

    Anyone with a functioning brain would know it wasn't the McCann's.

    Can't believe I even have to say that.


  • #2019
    Plumbthedepths
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,653 ✭✭✭✭Plumbthedepths


    cnocbui wrote: »
    Yes, quite.



    No, under Portugese law as it was at the time, the McCanns were not guilty of abandonment. The PJ in PDL certainly tried for that, but I guess the prosecutor told them that kite wouldn't fly. Apparently the apartments proximity to the tapas bar and their schedule of checking was more than sufficient to discount abandonment.

    This article contradicts your claim tbh

    https://evoke.ie/2016/04/30/news/world/why-maddie-mccanns-parents-werent-prosecuted-for-abondonment


  • #2020
    cnocbui
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,185 ✭✭✭✭cnocbui


    Plumbthedepths wrote: »
    This article contradicts your claim tbh

    https://evoke.ie/2016/04/30/news/world/why-maddie-mccanns-parents-werent-prosecuted-for-abondonment

    A fine 2016 piece of revisionism and attempt at face-saving.
    The former minister added that it was ‘compassion’ from investigators that influenced the decision not to press charges against them

    That is classic comedy, right there. Otherwise known in less polite circles as a gobsmacking lie of the highest order.

    I remember chewing the cud on this back in 2007 and the conclusion was that the legal possibility of charges under Portuguese law were zilch, evidenced by no such charges being brought, despite media statements that the PJ were looking into that possibility.


  • #2021
    Plumbthedepths
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,653 ✭✭✭✭Plumbthedepths


    cnocbui wrote: »
    A fine 2016 piece of revisionism and attempt at face-saving.



    That is classic comedy, right there. Otherwise known in less polite circles as a gobsmacking lie of the highest order.

    I remember chewing the cud on this back in 2007 and the conclusion was that the legal possibility of charges under Portuguese law were zilch, evidenced by no such charges being brought, despite media statements that the PJ were looking into that possibility.

    Unless you have proven knowledge of the Portuguese legal system your "cud" chewing is nothing more than your opinion.


  • Advertisement
  • #2022
    limnam
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,345 ✭✭✭limnam


    Plumbthedepths wrote: »
    Unless you have proven knowledge of the Portuguese legal system your "cud" chewing is nothing more than your opinion.

    Otherwise known as. Quick goal post shift.


  • #2023
    iamwhoiam
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,260 ✭✭✭✭iamwhoiam


    cnocbui wrote: »
    Yes, quite.



    No, under Portugese law as it was at the time, the McCanns were not guilty of abandonment. The PJ in PDL certainly tried for that, but I guess the prosecutor told them that kite wouldn't fly. Apparently the apartments proximity to the tapas bar and their schedule of checking was more than sufficient to discount abandonment.

    Does it really matter what the law is ? Any decent person and any clear thinking parent would risk assess that apartment and see it was vulnerable and risky
    We dont need laws to tell us how to be responsible and how to keep our children safe .


  • #2024
    MonsterCookie
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 959 ✭✭✭MonsterCookie


    iamwhoiam wrote: »
    Does it really matter what the law is ? Any decent person and any clear thinking parent would risk assess that apartment and see it was vulnerable and risky
    We dont need laws to tell us how to be responsible and how to keep our children safe .

    agreed.

    but (and this isn't levelled at you) i don't see anyone on this thread defending the parents actions despite the claims of some posters i.e. the ones that continually remind us of their poor parenting (which i don't mind too much) but refuse to discuss anything else.

    do we need to start every post by saying how sh1ttily they behaved just to keep the pitchfork-wielding mob at bay?


  • #2025
    Plumbthedepths
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,653 ✭✭✭✭Plumbthedepths


    MonsterCookie wrote: »
    agreed.

    but (and this isn't levelled at you) i don't see anyone on this thread defending the parents actions despite the claims of some posters i.e. the ones that continually remind us of their poor parenting (which i don't mind too much) but refuse to discuss anything else.

    do we need to start every post by saying how sh1ttily they behaved just to keep the pitchfork-wielding mob at bay?

    So you've missed the comment from a poster who suggests leaving young kids on their own is not an issue. Sounds like a defence to me.


  • #2026
    iamwhoiam
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,260 ✭✭✭✭iamwhoiam


    MonsterCookie wrote: »
    agreed.

    but (and this isn't levelled at you) i don't see anyone on this thread defending the parents actions despite the claims of some posters i.e. the ones that continually remind us of their poor parenting (which i don't mind too much) but refuse to discuss anything else.

    do we need to start every post by saying how sh1ttily they behaved just to keep the pitchfork-wielding mob at bay?

    Look I was simply replying to a poster mentioning the law about abandonment . It was relevant for that post
    I am not bringing it up for the sake of it . In fact if you read my posts I agree with your points


  • #2027
    MonsterCookie
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 959 ✭✭✭MonsterCookie


    Plumbthedepths wrote: »
    So you've missed the comment from a poster who suggests leaving young kids on their own is not an issue. Sounds like a defence to me.

    missed that one which is why i asked you for more details.

    look, if someone says its ok, i disagree with them.


  • #2028
    Plumbthedepths
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,653 ✭✭✭✭Plumbthedepths


    MonsterCookie wrote: »
    missed that one which is why i asked you for more details.

    look, if someone says its ok, i disagree with them.

    No offence but may I suggest you read pervious comments.


  • #2029
    MonsterCookie
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 959 ✭✭✭MonsterCookie


    Plumbthedepths wrote: »
    No offence but may I suggest you read pervious comments.

    no offence taken - but i've read a substantial amount of this thread and have yet to see someone defend the parents actions by saying they're acceptable.

    when i asked you for examples you didn't provide any - telling me to read the thread is less than helpful.

    so I'm not inclined to read the thread again in the hope of finding something to support your claim.


  • #2030
    limnam
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,345 ✭✭✭limnam


    MonsterCookie wrote: »
    no offence taken - but i've read a substantial amount of this thread and have yet to see someone defend the parents actions by saying they're acceptable.

    when i asked you for examples you didn't provide any - telling me to read the thread is less than helpful.

    so I'm not inclined to read the thread again in the hope of finding something to support your claim.

    You only have to go back about two pages to find someone condoning their behavior.


  • #2031
    MonsterCookie
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 959 ✭✭✭MonsterCookie


    limnam wrote: »
    You only have to go back about two pages to find someone condoning their behavior.

    have done, and don't see it. unless you're referring to cnocbui's post about how rare abductions are? not exactly condoning it imo.

    from reading the claims, anyone would think there's a loud voice in this thread saying it's ok to leave your kids alone - and in fairness there is far from that. plenty of people saying it's not.


  • Advertisement
  • #2032
    cnocbui
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,185 ✭✭✭✭cnocbui


    MonsterCookie wrote: »
    have done, and don't see it. unless you're referring to cnocbui's post about how rare abductions are? not exactly condoning it imo.

    from reading the claims, anyone would think there's a loud voice in this thread saying it's ok to leave your kids alone - and in fairness there is far from that. plenty of people saying it's not.

    In fairness, I did own up to condoning the McCanns via an easily missed brief admission.


  • #2033
    Day Lewin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,874 ✭✭✭Day Lewin


    MonsterCookie wrote: »
    agreed.

    but (and this isn't levelled at you) i don't see anyone on this thread defending the parents actions despite the claims of some posters i.e. the ones that continually remind us of their poor parenting (which i don't mind too much) but refuse to discuss anything else.

    do we need to start every post by saying how sh1ttily they behaved just to keep the pitchfork-wielding mob at bay?

    Agreed: its the whole mob-taunting that I find so distasteful.

    I feel like somebody watching a witch-hunt - Burn them, burn them! Tar and feather them! Never let them forget for one moment how heinous we think they were!

    Yes, they were irresponsible etc etc etc

    But just imagine being in their minds - and the awful guilt, the regret, the fear and dread - and the shame - and ALSO, the gleeful mob always baying at the gates - THOSE WICKED EVIL PARENTS -- BURN THEM!!

    That mob mentality is humans being dangerous.


  • #2034
    ittakestwo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,702 ✭✭✭ittakestwo


    It was reported that CB had a half an hour phone call before Madeleine went missing. If they know that then they must know what country he was in from the phone call. The Sun reports that CB was not even in Portugal at the time Madeleine went missing? Fake news?


  • #2035
    dark crystal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,962 ✭✭✭✭dark crystal


    cnocbui wrote: »
    In fairness, I did own up to condoning the McCanns via an easily missed brief admission.

    You monster!! :mad:


  • #2036
    Plumbthedepths
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,653 ✭✭✭✭Plumbthedepths


    MonsterCookie wrote: »
    no offence taken - but i've read a substantial amount of this thread and have yet to see someone defend the parents actions by saying they're acceptable.

    when i asked you for examples you didn't provide any - telling me to read the thread is less than helpful.

    so I'm not inclined to read the thread again in the hope of finding something to support your claim.

    There is an expression " none as blind as those that will not see".


  • #2037
    MonsterCookie
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 959 ✭✭✭MonsterCookie


    Plumbthedepths wrote: »
    There is an expression " none as blind as those that will not see".

    whatever - you claim people condone the behaviour when it's not really a thing on this thread. even if one person has done, it doesn't change the fact that most do not agree with what the parents did. yet we keep hearing from the McCanns bashers 'i can't believe people think it's ok...'

    there is also another expression 'let he who has not sinned'.

    you're really plumbing the depths now...


  • #2038
    Plumbthedepths
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,653 ✭✭✭✭Plumbthedepths


    MonsterCookie wrote: »
    whatever - you claim people condone the behaviour when it's not really a thing on this thread. even if one person has done, it doesn't change the fact that most do not agree with what the parents did. yet we keep hearing from the McCanns bashers 'i can't believe people think it's ok...'

    there is also another expression 'let he who has not sinned'.

    you're really plumbing the depths now...

    Having been on many family holidays with my children , I've always managed to bring them home again. It never entered my head or that of my partner to leave them unattended for several hours at night . So in this regard I haven't sinned.


  • #2039
    cnocbui
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,185 ✭✭✭✭cnocbui


    dark crystal wrote: »
    You monster!! :mad:

    I don't have house insurance, either.


  • #2040
    dark crystal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,962 ✭✭✭✭dark crystal


    cnocbui wrote: »
    I don't have house insurance, either.

    Dear God, is there no end to your depravity??


  • Advertisement
  • #2041
    cnocbui
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,185 ✭✭✭✭cnocbui


    dark crystal wrote: »
    Dear God, is there no end to your depravity??

    None, I'm afraid.


Advertisement