10 years on we remember Madeleine McCann

10 years on we remember Madeleine McCann


　
Who would have thought that all that time ago, all those forums ago, we would still be here and trying to find justice for a little girl named Madeleine Beth McCann. A lovely little 3 year old who went on holiday with her parents and her brother and sister, and sadly never came back. We never met or knew Madeleine, yet she has become a part of our lives for all these years.
　
This forum was set up for people like myself who wanted to discuss this case. This forum does not purport to be an 'invesitigative' forum, no, it is simply a forum to discuss and share ones opinion and feelings, on the latest news stories and media.. It is not a hate forum, as some would like to say, we try to keep it well within the bounds of sensible and fair discusion. The media feed us stories, especially now at this time at such a fast pace, some total rubbish, some absolute fairytales, many not even factual and commentors wonder why people want to discuss, why people become frustrated, why forums and blogs exist. Most people do not hate the McCanns they are appalled at what is happening and the treatment others around the McCanns receive at the hands of the press. The McCanns do not help themselves with some of the things they do and have alleged to have said, or recorded on video.... Is it any wonder there is so much comment, there has never been another case like it in this country, stretching for such a lengh of time causing such controversy and taking of sides.
　
This case is like no other before it, and unlike most cold or closed cases we have a wealth of files to get our teeth into. However once again this forum does not condone delving into peoples lives, and personal information. Most of the witnesses and people on that holiday were mixed up in this through no fault of their own, taking a holiday and ending up as witnesses in a crime. None of them expected their statements to be aired on all the social media and discussed, therefore we must try and be fair and think of them, their families and chlldren.
　
Operation Grange has only a few months left to run, and may or may not continue if extra funding is available. I feel though that it is nearing an end, and my thinking is that they are going to solve this case, although I know many don't agree.
　
So 10 years on where are we, nothing has changed really, poor Madeleine is still missing, the Supreme Court tells us the McCanns were not cleared, and the newpapers and media print the same old rubbish stories as they did back in 2007. It is like being on a merry-go-round and you cannot get off.
　
I truly hope we get justice for Madeleine very soon,
　
Thinking of you Madeleine wherever you may be.



********************************
　
　

As a post script, just read Martin Brunt's piece, well the above will tell you this forum does not do hate, we like you are interested in a case so mystifying and perplexing that it is only human nature to want to discuss it.

RIP Brenda Leyland

I share these sentiments. I also add that no matter what they have done, I feel for Gerry and Kate - they lost a beautiful daughter and that loss is unimaginable. I dont like their actions following the loss -but I do understand
that they have suffered a major heartbreaking loss.

I certainly never thought that, when I first heard of a child going missing in Portugal, that it would become one of the strangest stories I've ever heard and that, 10 years later, it would still be as much of a media sensation as it was then.

Brilliant post that I totally agree with Candyfloss.

We don't hound people, we don't hate, we don't make money off Madeleine and we have nothing to gain or lose when the truth finally comes out. We simply discuss.

Madeleine deserves justice but nothing we say or do on this forum will have any effect other than to let anyone who reads it know that we don't believe all the stories the media tries to feed us such as the sightings, burglars etc.

Well said too, Poe. It's just good to be able to talk about the case freely which it's difficult to do on a general news site because of censorship and horrendous abuse from McCann supporters.

A very sad day today, who would have thought after hearing that shocking news broadcast in the early hours, that this story would still have no ending. 

here is a piece from the BBC.

'A beautiful child'

Amid the McCanns' heartbreak, the media attention and the disruption to the lives of those living in Luz - it can sometimes be forgotten this is a story about a missing girl.
Madeleine McCann - described as beautiful, confident and incredibly bright by her parents - had been excited about the trip that would prove so fateful.
There are many theories about what happened to her on 3 May 2007. Still, 10 years later, her fate remains an enduring mystery.
Perhaps the only thing people can be certain of is that something horrific happened to an innocent young girl who was just short of reaching her fourth birthday.

"A beautiful child, she didn't deserve that, as any child," says Mr Rego.
"We feel - and have always felt - very, very sorry, as people, as Christians, as parents, very, very sorry for the child, for Madeleine," he adds.
"When we talk about it [in Luz] that's how we remember."
But interest in Madeleine's disappearance shows little sign of abating.
In March, the Home Office granted an extra £85,000 to extend the current British police investigation - Operation Grange - for a further six months.
In the days leading up to the anniversary, the Metropolitan Police's Assistant Commissioner Mark Rowley said a "critical" line of inquiry was still being pursued.
"I know we have a significant line of inquiry which is worth pursuing, and because it's worth pursuing it could provide an answer, but until we've gone through it I won't know whether we are going to get there or not," he said.
He also said there was still no "definitive evidence" as to whether Madeleine is alive or dead.
In Luz, the majority of people are convinced she is dead. They want the media to stop invading their village, they want tourists to continue visiting and they want the little girl who came there on holiday 10 years ago to rest in peace.

The McCanns, however, remain certain she was abducted and have expressed hope she is still alive.
In a recent interview with the BBC, Gerry McCann said: "There's no evidence that Madeleine's dead.
"No parent is going to give up on their child unless they know for certain their child's dead, and we just don’t have any evidence."
Kate McCann said: "Whilst there's no evidence to give us any negative news, that hope is still there.
"My hope of Madeleine being out there is no less than it was almost 10 years ago."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-sh/mccann_shadow

I am not sure what people mean when they take the moral high ground about "making money off the back of a dead child".

It presumably means that funeral directors are morally bankrupt.
It presumably means that priests, vicars, rectors, rabbis, etc are morally bankrupt as they get paid for taking a service.
It presumably means that the police are morally bankrupt when they get paid for investigating a death.
It presumably means that the doctors who certify the death, and are paid for that, are also the lowest of the low.
Banks and solicitors charge for administration of the will.

Teacher get paid for teaching history, which is full of deaths. Or are they OK as long as they are not child deaths, maybe we can't mention those?

Then we get to people who make money out of selling the houses that formed part of the estate of the dead person, or their cars. The people who sell the bread for the sandwiches at the funeral.

Why is there anything specifically wrong about writing a book, and getting paid for it? Or running a website, and getting paid for it?

Many have made a good living from the media and writing about this story - the editors have admitted when Madeleine is on the front pages or a story inside, they sell lots more papers, a hell of a lot more papers.

It is certainly true many have earned money from the Madeleine case, many didn't have to be used imo.  I am thinking of the spokesman and woman, the solicitors/lawyers in two countries, PR management company in Portugal , Bell Pottinger the PI's etc etc.  Lot of money spent on those listed, when not really needed.  There would have never been the need for PI's if the case had stayed open which it could have done, and having two spokespeople paid huge amounts of money I could never get my head round.

Thank you candyfloss for a moving tribute on this sad day. I've never posted before on a forum on any other topic but I feel this case is of such national and symbolic importance that I wanted to join in and add my voice to the growing number of people who think justice has not been served. I am grateful for a place to share my thoughts and keep the memory of a small girl who should have been cherished alive.

The McCanns are disliked and I dislike them, I dislike them because they seem to me to epitomize so much that is wrong in modern society. The control of The media, the use of money and power to silence descenting voices and the way they turned personal loss into a business all turn me against them. Ironically, like many people I think the crime at the heart of this was not monstrous, I think it was an accident. I do however think that the subsequent treatment of Madeleine has been incredibly disrespectful and does suggest a degree of dysfunctionality that needs to be investigated. 

What followed became a monstrous deception of epic proportions and that is why people care so much, because that deception is so corrosive it is eating away at us as a nation and I think it is now looking very much like a national scandal. So I'm here because I won't be fobbed off, I'm tired of a sycophantic press and I want a thorough investigation which does not begin with an assumption that there was an abduction.

candyfloss wrote:Many have made a good living from the media and writing about this story - the editors have admitted when Madeleine is on the front pages or a story inside, they sell lots more papers, a hell of a lot more papers.

It is certainly true many have earned money from the Madeleine case, many didn't have to be used imo.  I am thinking of the spokesman and woman, the solicitors/lawyers in two countries, PR management company in Portugal , Bell Pottinger the PI's etc etc.  Lot of money spent on those listed, when not really needed.  There would have never been the need for PI's if the case had stayed open which it could have done, and having two spokespeople paid huge amounts of money I could never get my head round.

I think that innocent parents plead with the police to keep the case open.

I think that innocent parents would have done the reconstruction, in pouring rain, at 4am, if that is what the police wanted.

I think that if the parents had been the victims of a genuine abduction they would tell the truth about the timings for the whole day, even if the timings included rather a lot of wine, and rather little child checking.

I also cannot see the role of all those professionals, I cannot imagine even wanting a solicitor if I were innocent. Solicitors tell their clients not to answer questions, and I would happily answer any question, after all, I would need the police to have all the information they can.

It is a shame that the fund ever started, it has ruined a lot of lives.

mumof6 wrote:I am not sure what people mean when they take the moral high ground about "making money off the back of a dead child".

It presumably means that funeral directors are morally bankrupt.
It presumably means that priests, vicars, rectors, rabbis, etc are morally bankrupt as they get paid for taking a service.
It presumably means that the police are morally bankrupt when they get paid for investigating a death.
It presumably means that the doctors who certify the death, and are paid for that, are also the lowest of the low.
Banks and solicitors charge for administration of the will.

Teacher get paid for teaching history, which is full of deaths. Or are they OK as long as they are not child deaths, maybe we can't mention those?

Then we get to people who make money out of selling the houses that formed part of the estate of the dead person, or their cars. The people who sell the bread for the sandwiches at the funeral.

Why is there anything specifically wrong about writing a book, and getting paid for it? Or running a website, and getting paid for it?

I'm sorry, I appear to have unintentionally hit a nerve.

People die. It's a fact of life and the whole industry surrounding death is essential. It is not in itself morally bankrupt. Neither is a bereaved parent writing a book about their child, nor is running a website. I don't even think that a fund for the family of a dead person is wrong.

But the media trying to insert Madeleine's name into as many news articles as possible with the sole intention of creating more sales is, IMO, unethical.

The media lump us all together - every single one of us who is sceptical of the McCanns and discusses the case online is a "troll" who "hounds" the McCanns.

As I said, about this site, we don't hound people, we don't hate, we don't make money off Madeleine and we have nothing to gain or lose when the truth finally comes out. We simply discuss.

I didn't intend my post to read as taking the moral high ground.

My post was not a reply to you, more an expression of my bewilderment as to what people mean.

Why are pro-McCanns able to say that Amaral is making money off the back of a dead child by writing a book, and provoke such outrage?
And why is the McCanns making money from the same event, also by writing a book, not the same moral issue?

To me, it makes no sense, and I seriously would love to understand what it is that provokes moral indignation in some cases, and not in others.

@mumof6,

Ah, my mistake

As far as I can see, it's not the making of money off a dead child that outrages the pro-McCanns so much as who is making the money.

Poe wrote:@mumof6,

Ah, my mistake

As far as I can see, it's not the making of money off a dead child that outrages the pro-McCanns so much as who is making the money.

So exploitation of the death of a child is OK if it is done by the people who were meant to protect the child? But not if it happens to be done by a policeman who tried to work out what happened to the child, and has some ideas about it?

I am no further on trying to understand this, to me this is the reverse of what I would expect the moral principle to be.