Another repeat - The McCanns

[JamesW]

"I didn't accuse Murat of anything, I just asked for clarity when it came to his role in the abduction. If he's involved then he's involved, if he isn't then he isn't. No libel there because I didn't say he was involved or had done anything wrong."

Merely suggesting that he might be involved is enough for Mr Murat to sue for libel, as he has already done several times. You don't have to say he was involved, you merely have to suggest there are reasons to assume he might be, as you have clearly done. In the eyes of Mr Murat that is libel. If you wish to dispute this, you need to talk to Mr Murat directly.


"I asked for them to explain this evidence which could help to find their daughter. There was a body in the car and in the flat and nobody has been able to explain this reliable finding."

The Portuguese police say the finding is not reliable.

This was confirmed by the British police from Scotland Yard, who said that it was impossible to have detected a dead body in the car using sniffer dogs, as the dogs used to detect a 'death smell' were brought in far too long after Madeleine vanished, since a death scent lasts for no longer than a month.

[speedybert]

Let's face it.Is there anyone on this forum who has a child that has been abducted/murdered.Makes it fairly difficult to make a judgement as to how the McCanns should feel about their situation and how they should be acting.

I don't remember Ben Needham's parents being put under such scrutiny(20 years+ and still missing)The difference being that the McCanns are middle class,have good jobs are eloquent and are quite obviously media savvy.I too got fed up with seeing them on the tv day in/day out.But the fact remains they have a very photogenic daughter who has now been missing for 2 years.Whoever is to blame we shall probably never know.But Madeleine is still missing.


The McCann's made a mistake for which they will pay for for the rest of their lives.Equally people deal with grief and trauma in a variety of different ways.I remember watching a documentary a few years ago about Police Appeals and reconstructions.The programme was split 50/50 with those that had appeared in appeals/reconstructions and were actually the perpetrators and those that were not.Tellingly the man who appeared to be the least concerned and most likely guilty of his daughter's murder was innocent and the Psychologist said that he appeared to be precisely guilty for that reason.As it turned out he wasn't.His only crime being that he found it impossible to display his emotions in the same way as others.Perhaps the McCanns fall into that category.

Because if they are only guilty of leaving their daughter unattended while they were out at a meal you can't blame them from trying their damnedest to find her.

[beutelwolf]

JRPornstar wrote:

> You're pretty much spot on. I didn't watch it all, as I
> couldn't stand watching that pair. I thought they looked fake,
> their acting skills are obviously fading. And at no point did I
> see them say that they wanted her back...!!! They just said
> she's out there somwhere...

Well, if you didn't watch it all it is quite apparent that you did not see them saying that they wanted her back. Remains the question: how do you know that they looked fake if you did not watch it at all?

[JamesW]

"I didn't suggest that Murat was involved in the abduction, other people did. Asking him to clarify his alleged role in it or not isn't libel, because I didn't say he had done anything wrong."

As previously advised, talk to Mr Murat.


"The sniffer dogs and handlers were not employed by the Portuguese police so how would they be able to comment on the reliability, they wouldn't have any data about past performances. Please tell me what they so clearly detected in the flat and car then?"

The Portuguese police say that nothing was clearly detected. Scotland Yard agree with that assesssment.


"So the dogs detected a 'death smell' long after the abduction. This means that somebody died in the flat after the time of the abduction and/or was transported in the car, other than when the Mc Canns used it. Not too likely is it, Mr Lawyer."

As previously explained, the dogs didn't detect a death smell.


"If the sniffer dog evidence was pronounced to be so unreliable by two Police forces, why was it considered a useful tool in the first place and why did the Mc Canns subsequently get this very evidence ruled as inadmissible. Why be so keen to discount it if it was so rubbish anyway?"

The police officer who called for the sniffer dogs to be used did not have experience of using them and did not know that it was too late to be of any use. It was however some time before the police openly admitted this.


"Oh and the blood in the car matched their daughters 100%."

Not true. On 3 September 2007, John Lowe of the major incidents team of the Forensic Science Service (FSS) said it was impossible to conclude whether the blood taken from the car came from Madeleine McCann or not.
He said it might have come from Madeleine, but it also might have come from himself, John Lowe. It was that inconclusive.

[JamesW]

"Let's face it.Is there anyone on this forum who has a child that has been abducted/murdered.Makes it fairly difficult to make a judgement as to how the McCanns should feel about their situation and how they should be acting.

I don't remember Ben Needham's parents being put under such scrutiny(20 years+ and still missing)The difference being that the McCanns are middle class,have good jobs are eloquent and are quite obviously media savvy.I too got fed up with seeing them on the tv day in/day out.But the fact remains they have a very photogenic daughter who has now been missing for 2 years.Whoever is to blame we shall probably never know.But Madeleine is still missing.

The McCann's made a mistake for which they will pay for for the rest of their lives.Equally people deal with grief and trauma in a variety of different ways.I remember watching a documentary a few years ago about Police Appeals and reconstructions.The programme was split 50/50 with those that had appeared in appeals/reconstructions and were actually the perpetrators and those that were not.Tellingly the man who appeared to be the least concerned and most likely guilty of his daughter's murder was innocent and the Psychologist said that he appeared to be precisely guilty for that reason.As it turned out he wasn't.His only crime being that he found it impossible to display his emotions in the same way as others.Perhaps the McCanns fall into that category.

Because if they are only guilty of leaving their daughter unattended while they were out at a meal you can't blame them from trying their damnedest to find her."


Well summed up, speedybert.