McCanns: Is anyone laughing at their sick joke?
"The parents of Madeleine McCann have backed a scheme to use social networking websites Facebook and Bebo to help trace missing children".
Is this some kind of sick joke? The parents who refuse to take responsibility for the disappearance of their own child supporting a missing children initiative? Isn't this a bit like Dr Harold Shipman supporting care for the elderly?
A mixture of law, politics, autobiography and humour. Once described as "The Devilish Advocate" (Guardian), I do have the ability to provoke a response. Sometimes it comes from someone who uses a thought process, and sometimes from jerks usually associated with the knee.
9 comments:
THE MCCANNS HAVE NOT BEEN CHARGED WITH ANY CRIME.
DON'T YOU THINK THAT THERE WOULD BE MOVES BY THE PORTUGUESE AUTHORITES TO MAKE CHARGES BY NOW? MORE THAN A YEAR AFTER THE DISAPPEARANCE?
THE ONLY EVIDENCE AVAILABLE IS THAT EXTRACTED FROM A FICTIONAL BOOK WRITTEN BY AN EX-COP WHO INTERVIEWED THE MCCANNS THAT WAS SUBSEQUENTLY LIFTED AND USED AS FODDER IN A SPANISH NEWSPAPER.
THE MCCANNS HAVE NOT BEEN CHARGED WITH ANY OFFENCE. THIS IS THE REASON I BELIEVE THIS BLOG IS NOT WRITTEN BY JOHN HIRST, WHO VALUES THE HUMAN RIGHTS OF OFFENDERS.
THE3ARGUIDOS PERVERTS AND PAEDOPHILES, THE MEMBERS, HAVE ACTED AS JUDGE AND JURY AND HAVE CONVICTED THE MCCANNS BY VIRTUE OF ANONYMOUS POSTINGS AT AN ANONYMOUS WEBSITE IN THE MISTAKEN BELIEF THAT THEY ARE PROTECTED BECAUSE 3a HOSTS ARE IN THE USA.
LIBEL LAW IN THE USA
WHEN LIBEL IS CLEAR ON ITS FACE, WITHOUT THE NEED FOR ANY EXPLANTORY MATTER, IT IS CALLED LIBEL PER SE. THE FOLLOWING ARE FOUND TO BE LIBELLOUS PER SE.
A STATEMENT THAT FALSELY:
CHARGES ANY PERSON WITH CRIME, OR WITH HAING BEEN INDICTED, CONVICTED, OR PUNISHED FOR CRIME.
THE MCCANNS HAVE NOT BEEN CHARGED WITH ANY CRIME.
Yes, isn't it remarkable?
I am somewhat surprised at the delay, however, had the McCanns answered all the PJs questions rather than flee back to the UK at the next available flight, the moves might well have been concluded by now.
Not true. There is evidence of child neglect, and evidence that the McCanns faked a break-in.
Remarkable isn't it? I am not a clone, I author this blog. I am glad that we agree that the McCanns are offenders. Of course they have human rights. But so did Madeleine when she was alive.
I think your accusation strays into being libel.
Over here we deal with European law and not law from the US.
As you keep pointing out, the McCanns haven't been charged yet. Still, we live in hope.
Didn't Jeffrey Archer successfully bring a libel siut to defend himself against just such scurrilous rumour-mongering. (chuckle, chuckle)
By the way anonymous, I know the USA is the global policeman, but isn't invoking US libel in this case taking things a little far?
anonymous @ 8.25: Your comment has been deleted because it was abusive.
THE MCCANNS ADMITTED FROM DAY ONE THAT THEY HAD LEFT THE CHILDREN ALONE IN THE APARTMENT AND WERE CHECKING ON THEM EVERY 30 MINUTES.
FOR FOUR MONTHS, THE PJ HAD EVERY OPPORTUNITY TO CHARGE THEM WITH NEGLECT FROM DAY ONE, BUT MADE IT CLEAR THAT THEY WERE NOT GOING DOWN THAT ROUTE, BECAUSE ALL THE CHILDREN AND ALL THE PARENTS WERE ON MARK WARNER PREMISES AT THE TIME OF MADELEINE'S DISAPPEARANCE. THE MARK WARNER PROPERTY IS NOT EVEN PORTUGUESE TERRITORY. IT IS A BRITISH PURPOSE BUILT COMPANY RUN BY BRITISH RULES OF A BRITISH ESTABLISHMENT FOR THE SPECIFIC PURPOSES OF CATERING FOR HOLIDAYMAKERS.
THE EX-COP WHO INTERVIEWED THE MCCANNS ILLEGALLY LEAKED SOME INCORRECT INFORMATION THAT THE MCCANNS WERE LIKELY TO FACE A CHARGE OF ACCIDENTAL HOMICIDE, WHICH FORCED THE MCCANNS TO EMPLOY SUCH HIGH POWERED LEGAL ADVISERS.
THE PJ HAVE NEVER CALLED THE MCCANNS BACK TO PORTUGAL. THEY WOULD HAVE TO RETURN UNDER THE LEGAL CONDITIONS THEY AGREED TO WHEN THEY LEFT PORTUGAL. THAT PROVISO STILL STANDS. STILL THE PJ HAVE NOT CALLED THEM BACK.
IF THE PORTUGUESE AUTHORITIES WANTED TO LAY CHARGES, THEY COULD HAVE DONE SO WHEN THEY VISITED LEICESTER COP SHOP TO QUESTION THE TAPAS GROUP. IT WAS OBVIOUS THAT THEY HAD NO INCLINATION TO LAY ANY CHARGES, NOR HAD EVIDENCE AGAINST THE MCCANNS.
"MARK WARNER PROPERTY IS NOT EVEN PORTUGUESE TERRITORY. IT IS A BRITISH PURPOSE BUILT COMPANY RUN BY BRITISH RULES OF A BRITISH ESTABLISHMENT FOR THE SPECIFIC PURPOSES OF CATERING FOR HOLIDAYMAKERS."
Anonymous, forgive me if I accuse you of talking out of your rear end, but are we to believe that a glorified holiday camp enjoys the same status as an embassy and that those within its bounds enjoy diplomatic immunity. Please grow up and try to base your arguments on logical fact and not this pseudo-tabloid hogwash for the intellectually impaired.
Regarding not having been charged with any offence, you have shot yourself through the foot on that one. If, no-one can be suspected, and is to be considered as innocent as the day they were born, until charged, then no-one would ever be charged with anything, The police not being in the habit of investigating those whom they consider to be innocent of any crime. When one is named as a suspect in a police enquiry, that generally infers that suspicion exists. QED.
You all need to go research Lindy Chamberlain who was wrongly convicted and jailed for the murder of her baby.
"The police not being in the habit of investigating those whom they consider to be innocent of any crime."
When you have looked at it thoroughly, repeat what you have just written. Shows you are wrong!
"The police not being in the habit of investigating those whom they consider to be innocent of any crime."
Read it carefully. I stand by the comment. The police are in the habit of investigating those that they (they being the police) BELIEVE to be possibly implicated in a crime. I say no more and no less than this.
The statement is simple logic and therefore is in no way wrong. Lindy Chamberlain's eventual acquittal does not detract in the slightest from the veracity of this. At the time of her conviction she was BELIEVED to be implicated.
The coroner at the third and final inquest recorded the cause of death as unknown. Still a loose end I'd say.
Still doesn't mean she was guilty. Like I said at Nourishing, public opinion does not automatically attribute guilt. Yes the child was left alone and that was a grave mistake, but all this public opinion that the parents must of done away with Madeleine or had a hand in her disappearance are nothing but pure speculation at this point. Amazing how the world has so many judges and juries, yet none of you are privy to the entire police report. Being believed as being guilty does NOT make you guilty.
Post a Comment