permalink for this thread : http://search.catflaporama.com/post/browse/537062
one-two-many Posted on 22/07/2008 12:29
The McCann's spokesman

Doing a live debate on the Sky News website now. Could be quite intresting


Link: SKY NEWS

Boromart Posted on 22/07/2008 12:40
The McCann's spokesman

Why on earth do they need a spokesman?

Jonny_Ingbar Posted on 22/07/2008 12:41
The McCann's spokesman

To help repair the damage done by the Portugese police and the media perhaps?

sasboro1 Posted on 22/07/2008 12:43
The McCann's spokesman

I think they needed someone to be a buffer to protect them from the media. You cant trust the media with all the allegations they made up just to sell stories. Imagine the media hassling you everyday

one-two-many Posted on 22/07/2008 12:45
The McCann's spokesman

Somebody asked that.....

[Comment From judy]
Why do an 'ordinary' couple need a spokesperson?

12:31 Clarence Mitchell - Gerry and Kate McCann have come under unprecedented international media interest. Any family facing such intense interest in everything they say and do is entitled to have help if they wish it. A spokesman takes much of the pressure off their shoulders. At times, I have to deal with hundreds of calls a day on their behalf.

THEBOROBOSS Posted on 22/07/2008 12:46
The McCann's spokesman

If they Hadn't left the kids unattented to go and have a Jolly Up there would be know need for a spokesman.

buttermyarse Posted on 22/07/2008 12:49
The McCann's spokesman

Brutal but true Boroboss.....

Boromart Posted on 22/07/2008 12:50
The McCann's spokesman

many families have appeared in front of the media in similar circumstances....without having their characters assassinated. They didn't need a spokesman.

Who is paying for the spokesman? The people who gave money to help find Madeline, I don't think the PR of the parents was what they were signing up for!

mailinator Posted on 22/07/2008 12:53
The McCann's spokesman

Yes it was boromart.

captain5 Posted on 22/07/2008 13:18
The McCann's spokesman

Not true, mailinator.

Independent financial backer unconnected with the Maddie fund.

bernieisgod Posted on 22/07/2008 13:21
The McCann's spokesman

what a pack of sanctimonious B******s we are!
Thank God we are all so bloody perfect - I have 4 kids, have I never accidentally put 1 or more of them into a situation that could have been dangerous? Probably have to be honest - we all make hundreds of decisions and we all make mistakes.
Nobody (no innocent person) should have to face the viciousness of the british media alone (well, maybe the Gary Glitters of this world!)

sasboro1 Posted on 22/07/2008 13:25
The McCann's spokesman

mccanns won 500k in a libel case against the british papers, so for all we know that could be funding a spokesman

Boromart Posted on 22/07/2008 13:26
The McCann's spokesman

"what a pack of sanctimonious B******s we are!" -- They have used spin and PR to manipulate the media for 18 months, and tell us how it isn't their fault.

I think we have all earned the right to have an opinion.

Sas they had a spokesperson after about a week, any libel awards must be recent.

captain5 Posted on 22/07/2008 13:26
The McCann's spokesman

I've already told you how he is being funded.

mailinator Posted on 22/07/2008 13:28
The McCann's spokesman

"Not true, mailinator.

Independent financial backer unconnected with the Maddie fund."

Boromart stated what people signed up for when they made a donation, I suspect most were just happy to cover any expenses they had. It would seem to me that making a donation would always be to cover any expenses they encountered and that having a spokesman considering the amount of press work they had to do was always going to be a required expense.

bernieisgod Posted on 22/07/2008 13:28
The McCann's spokesman

everyone is entitled to an opinion - mine is that in general we are a pack of sanctimonious B******s!

captain5 Posted on 22/07/2008 13:29
The McCann's spokesman

What they've done is actually stand up for themselves against the media, whereas most people wouldn't or if they did, end up getting a two line apology in three months time at the bottom of page 46.

theboydom Posted on 22/07/2008 13:33
The McCann's spokesman

aye, but just remember boromart's view of the case is slightly coloured by his policeman mate telling him because gerry mcann wouldn't look to the left when talking to the media scrum one day he is definitely guilty.

of something.

probably an ira sleeper cell. get the alsation on his nads and he will tell us anything we want to know. no, wait, i mean confirm his undoubted guilt so then he can be tried fairly, no wait, you're twisting my words [:D]

bernieisgod Posted on 22/07/2008 13:33
The McCann's spokesman

tb - sweet! [:)]

Boromart Posted on 22/07/2008 13:34
The McCann's spokesman

come on capt, they got into bed with the media, they used the media. Not just to find madeline, but also to keep the focus away from their parenting 'skills'. As soon as the media stopped playing to their tune then it's a problem. Double standards if you ask me.

theboydom the old FMTTM misquotation machine is alive and kicking. What I actually said was that Gerry was lying in relation to that question because he did look to his left. Not just because n ex-senior policeman said it, but because it is basic human nature. Go look it up if you like, the internet is a great tool.

Thats what I said, and I stand by it. They lied several times on camera.

bernieisgod Posted on 22/07/2008 13:36
The McCann's spokesman

I think they have been amazing - I doubt I could have handled myself that well in those circumstances. The british media is the scummiest in the world - the media must be the biggest pack of B******s around!

sasboro1 Posted on 22/07/2008 13:38
The McCann's spokesman

nah, dont think the mccanns are in bed with the media. certainly not after sueing them for 500k! initially they would because they wanted publicity to find their daughter. Media dont care as long as it sell more papers. we( the nation) are just daft for keep wanting to buy the papers with the stories in.

captain5 Posted on 22/07/2008 13:38
The McCann's spokesman

So they kept the focus away from their parenting skills??

Well, if you mean the papers outright accused them of being involved with the girl's disappearance instead then you may be right.

If it was my child I would do everything I could to keep it in the public eye and I would think most people would try the same.


bernieisgod Posted on 22/07/2008 13:39
The McCann's spokesman

exactly right Captain!

Boromart Posted on 22/07/2008 13:40
The McCann's spokesman

"The british media is the scummiest in the world - the media must be the biggest pack of B******s around!" -- something we CAN agree on.

bernieisgod Posted on 22/07/2008 13:41
The McCann's spokesman

finally - I'm putting this in my diary boromart!

mailinator Posted on 22/07/2008 13:48
The McCann's spokesman

"What I actually said was that Gerry was lying in relation to that question because he did look to his left. Not just because n ex-senior policeman said it, but because it is basic human nature. Go look it up if you like, the internet is a great tool."

BullS***. Looking to the left does not mean you are lying. All those tells such as moving the eyes while talking, body language and voice tone are supposed to be used in combination with each other to assess if someone is lying. Still, even if someone has all the tells it does not mean they are lying still, people are not computers.

Looking to the left means that somebody is constructing a sound in their head they have not heard yet. eg: "Did you hear any screams?" -> eyes left -> answer: "no"

Secondly, people who are left-handed, tend to have the eye-movement tells reversed, was your copper mate Portuguese by any chance?

To suggest it MEANS they are lying is disingenuous but demonstrates the river of bullS*** that has followed them throughout this enquiry and perfectly illustrates WHY a spokesman or PR advice is essential.

Boromart Posted on 22/07/2008 13:53
The McCann's spokesman

"people are not computers" -- no they are not, which is why in times of stress 'human nature' kicks in.

You can believe or disbelieve all you like. I have read theory on this kind of thing. I know a top criminal psychologist who works in the insurance fraud industry. There are lots of tell tale signs, that indicate when someone is lying.

I will continue to believe that they know more than they have let on. Partly because of the looking to the left thing. Partly because of the way they have conducted themselves, partly because there appears to be no DNA evidence of any other people on the room. Partly because the whole story is so fanciful and just doesn't ring true.

You continue to think they are purely the victims of a heinous crime.

There is no middle ground on this one.

theboydom Posted on 22/07/2008 13:58
The McCann's spokesman

or the good looking blond reporter to his right distracted him somewhat...

mailinator Posted on 22/07/2008 13:58
The McCann's spokesman

When I said that "people are not computers", I meant that they are not identical and cannot be predicted 100%.

It is impossible to 'read' someone from one interview to determine that looking left meant they were lying as you would need to set them some controlled questions to determine their baseline plus you would need to determine if they were left handed or not. So, in summary, you can believe your copper mate all you want but in reality you are just speculating like an old voyeuristic woman knitting at the guillotine.

joseph99 Posted on 22/07/2008 14:00
The McCann's spokesman

Clarence Mitchell (what a lovely chap) was on R5L this morning moaning about some Portuguese copper who was about to write a book on his view of the events. He said that their legal team would be scrutinising any publication so the policeman would have to be extremely careful. He said that it was unfortunate that a retired policeman was making money out of the dissappearance of Madeline. Erm, so Clarence you are a volunteer and doing this work for free???? There has been far too much hypocrisy in this sad case.

Boromart Posted on 22/07/2008 14:01
The McCann's spokesman

exactly joseph.

mailinator Posted on 22/07/2008 14:04
The McCann's spokesman

I think the key part of that phrase is "it was unfortunate that a ***retired policeman*** was making money out of the disappearance of Madeline"

If you can't see why that is different from someone being employed by a family to speak on their behalf, then god help you.

Boromart Posted on 22/07/2008 14:11
The McCann's spokesman

maybe it's not about the money mailinator, maybe he just wants the truth to be out in the open.

I would be worried about what the McCanns lawyers are trying to supress from public consumption.

mailinator Posted on 22/07/2008 14:12
The McCann's spokesman

Well you need to find more important things to worry about.

Boromart Posted on 22/07/2008 14:13
The McCann's spokesman

what they are doing is actually trying to censor the book through the threat of legal action. Why would they do that. If there wwere lies in the book they could sue afterwards and be seen to be clean.


joseph99 Posted on 22/07/2008 14:14
The McCann's spokesman

I don't recall other unfortunate parents in similar circumsatnces using a high profile press officer. They haven't had to.

sasboro1 Posted on 22/07/2008 14:15
The McCann's spokesman

dont know why boromart has such a chip on his shoulder about the mccanns. seems to be thinking they are guilty of the disappearance. maybe you should work for the police in portugal?

mailinator Posted on 22/07/2008 14:19
The McCann's spokesman

"what they are doing is actually trying to censor the book through the threat of legal action. Why would they do that. If there wwere lies in the book they could sue afterwards and be seen to be clean."

Perhaps they would rather the officer did not just publish a load of crap to encourage sales before backtracking later once the damage was done?

"I don't recall other unfortunate parents in similar circumsatnces using a high profile press officer. They haven't had to."

I'm honestly struggling to think of one family in the same sort of situation. Who are we talking about here? The Matthews family?

bernieisgod Posted on 22/07/2008 14:20
The McCann's spokesman

exactly sas - the idea that this portugese ex-copper may just want the truth out there is fairly funny - not sure anyone could seriously believe this isn't a case of him seeing his chance of making buckets of cash.
maybe boromart knows more than we do on this one? The truth is out there...

sasboro1 Posted on 22/07/2008 14:25
The McCann's spokesman

if this copper knows the truth then why is he going to put it in a book rather than in court? makes more sense to use it as evidence than to just make some money off it. was he due to retire or made to retire cos it was C****ed up.

joseph99 Posted on 22/07/2008 14:28
The McCann's spokesman

Sarah Payne has done a good job. Plus she's working class and without wanting to sound ghoulish probably a worse case.

mailinator Posted on 22/07/2008 14:35
The McCann's spokesman

Sarah Payne's body was found about 2 weeks after her disappearance and the murderer located and convicted. Their family simply did not need to keep the case in the media spotlight as she'd already been 'found'.

Boromart Posted on 22/07/2008 14:36
The McCann's spokesman

"seems to be thinking they are guilty of the disappearance."

a) I don't think disappearance is a crime, so I fail to see how they could be guilty of it.

b) I've made it perfectly clear in the past that they may not have killed her, but I feel there is much more to htis than we are aware of, there is no need for you to be words in my mouth sas.


Boromart Posted on 22/07/2008 14:38
The McCann's spokesman

"I'm honestly struggling to think of one family in the same sort of situation." -- kids dissapear every year, the press often take an interest, and a long standing interest. there are several cases particularly from the 70s which have had media attention 20 years after they happened. It's only the McCanns that have used the press in this manner and have generated the 'need' for a PR team.

sasboro1 Posted on 22/07/2008 14:38
The McCann's spokesman

sorry my wording was wrong, just meant you have them down as guilty based on what you have read in the media,. which turned out to be libel and mccanns successfully sued.

you dont realise that the media took hold of it and whipped the whole thing up as it would sell papers. it is them who keep the whole thing goign in the press.

PoetLaureate Posted on 22/07/2008 14:40
The McCann's spokesman

The McCann's will never be able to do anything correct in the eyes of most of the public:

Cry = guilty
no emotion = heartless

That is what most people think.

Boromart Posted on 22/07/2008 14:41
The McCann's spokesman

"guilty based on what you have read in the media,. " -- and equally you have them down as innocent base don what the media have told you.

What exactly were teh press sued for? does it cover any of the things I have mentioned, if not then it's irrelevant that they won damages from the press.

"Cry = guilty" -- I have never seen anyone say that.

mailinator Posted on 22/07/2008 14:44
The McCann's spokesman

boromart, you say they have lied and the "know more than they are letting on" but then claim "I am not accusing them of anything".

You've been doing this for ages, casting doubt and uncertainty over the facts in this case but then backtracking and claiming you have an open mind on it.

joseph99 Posted on 22/07/2008 14:45
The McCann's spokesman

Denise Fergus could have done with a "free" PO.


Link: no press officer

Boromart Posted on 22/07/2008 14:45
The McCann's spokesman

"you dont realise that the media took hold of it and whipped the whole thing up as it would sell papers. it is them who keep the whole thing goign in the press." -- I don't agree with that interpretation. Initially the McCanns drove the story through their PR people, THEY controlled it. Thats what PR does.

Suddenly the portuguese police started to look into them, a completely natural state of affairs in these cases, and not all of the press towed the line that the McCanns PR machine demanded. It then became a with or against situation as far as each peper was concerned, media battle lines were drawn the McCanns lost cotrol of the story. The whole thing esculated into a sad state of affairs.

Boromart Posted on 22/07/2008 14:46
The McCann's spokesman

Mailinator, you attribute this quote to me: "I am not accusing them of anything"....yet I did not say it or anything remotely like it.

"You've been doing this for ages, casting doubt and uncertainty over the facts in this case"
There ARE doubts and uncertainties overthe facts of the case. That is why it is both unsolved, and there are zero suspects.

"but then backtracking and claiming you have an open mind on it." -- I'm not claiming to be entirely open-minded, and I'm not backtracking on anything. I've said twice in this thread and a million times before that I believe they know more than they are letting on. I don't believe they are whiter than white in this case.

mailinator Posted on 22/07/2008 14:47
The McCann's spokesman

Joseph, Denise Fergus' son's body was found the same day he was taken and the guilty lads who did it were arrested very soon afterwards. These cases do not compare too well to the McCann one on (and I'll say this yet again) the fact that The McCann's have not found out what happened to their daughter and have not found the person responsible for her disappearance.

Lefty Posted on 22/07/2008 14:51
The McCann's spokesman

I think they probably did it, but that is just my logical conclusion on the balance of probabilities.

Bungled investigation, we'll never know until the poor girls body turns up.

mailinator Posted on 22/07/2008 14:52
The McCann's spokesman

boromart:

"I've made it perfectly clear in the past that they may not have killed her"

"Perfectly clear" is not how I would describe your "stance" on them. Deliberately vague is probably a better description.

joseph99 Posted on 22/07/2008 14:53
The McCann's spokesman

My point is not the comparision of the different cases (all are different) but the reaction to the press in these cases. They decided to use their strong connections and professional status to dance with the media devil - they then get angry when they get burn't. That's my point. They've made more mistakes since neglecting their daughter.

Mojo Posted on 22/07/2008 14:55
The McCann's spokesman

Just caught some one saying how perfect we all are...
Well a next door neighbour ( who worked for social services before switching to teaching) said "oh well we've all done it haven't we?"

The answer is no...my parents never left myself or my siblings in the same way as the McCanns did....they messed up...and are paying the price for it. We might never know the truth.

Boromart Posted on 22/07/2008 14:57
The McCann's spokesman

vague in that if I knew what they did then so would the police and they would be in prison by now.

My stance is clear, they are not being entirely honest with the public. The censorship of a book stinks of trying to keep certain unwholesome facts under the covers.

I'm amazed at how blindly optimistic people are about the McCanns and their innocence. Maybe it's just because people don't want ot accept that horrible things happen to/by middle class people. People ridicule anyone who dare have the opinion that they might not be telling the whole truth.

joseph99 Posted on 22/07/2008 14:58
The McCann's spokesman

Mojo - I know a few social workers and they redefine the term pseudo-intellectual and can be very dangerous people.

mailinator Posted on 22/07/2008 15:00
The McCann's spokesman

You're amazed at how blindly optimistic people are? I'm amazed people can make such sweeping statements such as accusing people of being liars on the basis of what amounts to some sort of feeling in your bones. At least you've dropped that ridiculous 'pseudo-scientific' clap-trap about them looking to the left, I'll credit you with that.

Lefty Posted on 22/07/2008 15:00
The McCann's spokesman

Innocent OR guilty, I wouldn't want an ex-copper publishing a book about the case.

sasboro1 Posted on 22/07/2008 15:01
The McCann's spokesman

go on boromart why not just spit it out and say the mccanns are behind the disapearance of their daughter. but you obviosuly dont need evidence to back it up. i hope you never get to do jury service!

Boromart Posted on 22/07/2008 15:04
The McCann's spokesman

"accusing people of being liars on the basis of what amounts to some sort of feeling in your bones" -- I've told you why, your over-simplifying and ridiculing it because you can't face it head on. The facts of the case point towards the McCanns.....that's why the Portuguese police made them suspects. Like it or not, the Portuguese police are not convinced of their innocence.

Of course the usual retort is well they aren't in prison so they aren't guilty. Well there is a difference to being guilty and being found guilty. Ask O J Simpson.

Mojo Posted on 22/07/2008 15:05
The McCann's spokesman

Joseph, you generally find some of the said people never use common sense. Had a woman in my town who was a crack addict...she kicked it...did everything the workers told her to do..got a new house..cleaned up her act...gave birth to a baby daughter..and what did the bar stewards do? Took it away from her!

Boromart Posted on 22/07/2008 15:06
The McCann's spokesman

sas there is nothing to spit out, I've made my position clear. If that is difficult for you to understand then don't try. You obviously are not open minded to the case and the facts on the table, you and mailinator would rather go with your gut feeling that these middleclass professionals are entirely innocent.

sasboro1 Posted on 22/07/2008 15:11
The McCann's spokesman

"The facts of the case point towards the McCanns.....that's why the Portuguese police made them suspects. Like it or not, the Portuguese police are not convinced of their innocence."

what facts is that?
made them suspects like that morat bloke?
portuguese police hold no credit on this case so how can they be take seriously? in the end no charges have come forward, depsite allt eh man hours put into this and the media attention and scrutiny. I dont think the mccanns are experienced enough in kidnapping/murder to hide traces. boromart, you shouldnt beleive what you read in the media..the mccans successfully sued the papers for over 100 made up stories. I dread to think what would happen if you were on a jury.


joseph99 Posted on 22/07/2008 15:11
The McCann's spokesman

Mojo: I know one social worker very well who has two kids. She absolutely dotes on one of them to the point where you would think she had only 1 kid. It is shocking behaviour. If that's her idea of a 'busman's holiday' I'd hate to think she was responsible for someone I cared about in her job.

mailinator Posted on 22/07/2008 15:12
The McCann's spokesman

"The facts of the case point towards the McCanns.....that's why the Portuguese police made them suspects. Like it or not, the Portuguese police are not convinced of their innocence."

Yet they have ceased the investigation. If there really were FACTS that pointed at their guilt this would not have happened. Oh, are we talking about YOUR type of facts which amount to sucking the air through your teeth and saying "oh, I dunno there's more to this than meets the eye!!!!!"

"Of course the usual retort is well they aren't in prison so they aren't guilty. Well there is a difference to being guilty and being found guilty. Ask O J Simpson."

Yeah, and there's a fooking HUGE difference between being charged and tried for a crime and the police deciding to remove their suspect status and close the investigation.

Jesus christ, I do not know how you dare to continue to mock other people's views on this when your own are so fooking distorted beyond logic itself.

Boromart Posted on 22/07/2008 15:18
The McCann's spokesman

"what facts is that?"
There is no evidence of any other person in that appartment, no DNA evidence in the bushes or windows outside.

"portuguese police hold no credit on this case so how can they be take seriously?"
Well they are privvy to a lot more than you or I, so of course some evidence must point towards them. The McCanns and british media (working for the McCann PR team) would like you to believe that they are a cross between the Keystone Cops and Inspecter Cleaseau, but I doubt that is the case at all. you have let the McCanns PR influence you.

"in the end no charges have come forward, depsite allt eh man hours put into this and the media attention and scrutiny."
The media attention in this case has actually harmed the case. the portuguese police have had every word they utter ripped to bits. The case has been undermined by the media.

"I dont think the mccanns are experienced enough in kidnapping/murder to hide traces. "
Firstly answer this question: Do you know them? Then this one: Are you experienced enough to know what that would involve? If the answer to both of these is NO, then you are not in a position to make that judgement.

"you shouldnt beleive what you read in the media"
I'll bat that one right back at you, but ten times as fast.


mailinator Posted on 22/07/2008 15:20
The McCann's spokesman

So, in summary, there is no evidence to point at their guilt.


I must say, boromart, I liked this bit: "Firstly answer this question: Do you know them? Then this one: Are you experienced enough to know what that would involve? If the answer to both of these is NO, then you are not in a position to make that judgement."

Remind us all about the "looking left" guilt test please????

Boromart Posted on 22/07/2008 15:23
The McCann's spokesman

"If there really were FACTS that pointed at their guilt"
Some facts are circumstantial in a court of law. For example the fact that there is zero DNA evidence of a kidnapper doesn't prove they did it, but makes the story that they are putting forward against probability.

"Yeah, and there's a fooking HUGE difference between being charged and tried for a crime"
Yup there is, you have to have enough evidence to prove in a court of law. So they had some (hence making them suspects) but not enough for a result (hence it didn't go to court). Of course the portuguese police reputation would be destroyed if they took it to court and lost. The McCanns PR team strikes again.

"Jesus christ, I do not know how you dare to continue to mock other people's views on this when your own are so fooking distorted beyond logic itself." -- I have distorted absolutely nothing.

Please tell me why you are so convinced of their innocence?

Look there is no middle ground, you will not convince me of their innocence and I will not convince you of their guilt. It's no skin of my nose. If you want to carry on posting thats up to you but I've made my view clear, live with it and move on.

mailinator Posted on 22/07/2008 15:30
The McCann's spokesman

"Please tell me why you are so convinced of their innocence?"

I'm not and never have been. It's for those who think they are guilty to prove it.

sasboro1 Posted on 22/07/2008 15:32
The McCann's spokesman

dont we live in a world that someone is innocent until proven guilty? imagine what would happen if you had to prove your innocence? guilty until proven innocent!

Boromart Posted on 22/07/2008 15:32
The McCann's spokesman

"I'm not and never have been." -- so what is your opinion?

mailinator Posted on 22/07/2008 15:33
The McCann's spokesman

My opinion is explained perfectly by sas above and is also shared by most of the worlds developed countries when it comes to criminal law.

Boromart Posted on 22/07/2008 15:34
The McCann's spokesman

sas, you are talking about being found guilty within the confines of the legal system. You seem unable to distinguish between guilt and guilt within the legal system.

OJ Simpson was found not guilty within the confines of the legal system. The Birmingham 6 WERE found guilty within the confines of the legal system....outside of the legal system I don't think it would be wrong to say that OJ Simpson is guilty of his ex-wifes murder or that the Birmingham 6 are not guilty of blowing up a couple of pubs.

mailinator Posted on 22/07/2008 15:36
The McCann's spokesman

"OJ Simpson was found guilty within the confines of the legal system"

He was found not guilty of a criminal offence.

Boromart Posted on 22/07/2008 15:39
The McCann's spokesman

thank you mail, I mistyped that and have edited.

Big_Shot Posted on 22/07/2008 15:42
The McCann's spokesman

I never quite understood the outrage that came from them being declared suspects. It seems fairly reasonable that they would be investigated themselves. Surely its to be expected that after a few months investigating a certain line of enquiry that maybe they'd change focus if that doesn't uncover any shred of evidence to support it. Yet every one was up in arms that the incompetant Police would even dare suspect these people.



mailinator Posted on 22/07/2008 15:43
The McCann's spokesman

I really don't get this argument you are making. I'm saying innocent until proven guilty and your counter-argument to that seems to be that sometimes innocent people are found guilty and vice versa. That doesn't seem relevant to me. The whole point is you need more than a hunch to consider someone guilty and that just isn't enough to accuse someone of being somehow involved in their daughter's disappearance.

Boromart Posted on 22/07/2008 15:55
The McCann's spokesman

They left her alone, they are involved like it or not. I happen to believe that they are covering more up due to their behaviour.

My point which you seem to be struggling with is that guilt isn't something that is defined in court, only legal guilt is defined within a court. I felt guilty because I had some crisps today and I'm on a diet.

Was Peter Sutcliffe guilty of murder before his trial in 81? Damn right he was, he just wasnt 'convicted' of murder, he was still guilty in the non-legal sense. I'm not for one miute suggesting that people should be locked up without evidence but that doesn't mean they are innocent of a crime until a judge or jury says so.

Guilt is an emotion not just a legal term.

mickbrown Posted on 22/07/2008 16:02
The McCann's spokesman

You're a strange man Boromart.

Boromart Posted on 22/07/2008 16:05
The McCann's spokesman

says the man who spends half his life on the messageboard of a rival team. So whats your point or as usual don't you have one?

mickbrown Posted on 22/07/2008 16:07
The McCann's spokesman

He looked left therefore he must lying.

What a crock of shyte

sasboro1 Posted on 22/07/2008 16:07
The McCann's spokesman

"I'm not for one miute suggesting that people should be locked up without evidence but that doesn't mean they are innocent of a crime until a judge or jury says so."

think you have that wrong. they are not guilty/innocent until a judge or jury say otherwise. In the mccans case they havent even been charged with anything. why dont you think morat is just as guilty when he was a suspect and not charged jsut like the mccans

not sure where youa re going with this apart from twisting the discussion into something else so at some point you can claim a victory.

Boromart Posted on 22/07/2008 16:09
The McCann's spokesman

"they are not guilty/innocent until a judge or jury say otherwise."

1: the fact of having committed a breach of conduct especially violating law and involving a penalty; broadly : guilty conduct
2 a: the state of one who has committed an offense especially consciously b: feelings of culpability especially for imagined offenses or from a sense of inadequacy : self-reproach
3: a feeling of culpability for offenses

It isn't JUST a phrase used in law.

Like I said Sas, was peter sutcliffe guilty of murder before 1981? Simple question.

Where am I going with this? You said: "dont we live in a world that someone is innocent until proven guilty? imagine what would happen if you had to prove your innocence? guilty until proven innocent!"

We live in a LEGAL system where you have to prove guilt. We live in a WORLD were guilt and innocence are simply facts. To blindly say someone is innocent and I don't have to prove it is silly.

Like I said if you want to blindly believe that they are innocent without any evidence or without any access to the facts then thats up to you, but don't tell me my opinion is wrong, just because like you I can't prove it either.

mailinator Posted on 22/07/2008 16:14
The McCann's spokesman

I think he's twisting himself into knots as usual. When people are talking about a criminal offence, I don't know how you can have the balls to claim they are guilty on a hunch and then backtrack later by pretending you don't mean the sort of guilt that usually means you get convicted.

Big_Shot Posted on 22/07/2008 16:15
The McCann's spokesman

Even as someone who's always thought it was never quite as straightforward as has been made out, I think sas has it right. If there's no evidence against them then its only fair to assume they are innocent. However, as they is no evidence to support any other theory then it really is a mystery which I can't see being solved by police or private detectives. So questions and suspicions will always remain.

mickbrown Posted on 22/07/2008 16:16
The McCann's spokesman

I reckon he's a touch typist with a really incredibly high number of words per minute and his fingers sometimes outpace his thought process.

Boromart Posted on 22/07/2008 16:17
The McCann's spokesman

Mick if you have got nothing to add to the discussion fook off. This thread is about the McCanns not about me, regardless of one or two people like Sas and you trying to turn it into silly point scoring.

mailinator Posted on 22/07/2008 16:19
The McCann's spokesman

I reckon he's a computer program in which you simply supply a vague grasp of the basic facts as input and it spits out an argument designed to confuse as much as it tries to make a point. In the event that the argument is lost, it spits out a rebuttal for some other argument that no-one else is having.

Boromart Posted on 22/07/2008 16:19
The McCann's spokesman

right on cue.

downinman Posted on 22/07/2008 16:20
The McCann's spokesman


mickbrown Posted on 22/07/2008 16:22
The McCann's spokesman

You're opinions on the McCann's form my opinions of you.

Or am I not allowed to have an opinion?

Boromart Posted on 22/07/2008 16:23
The McCann's spokesman

start a thread about me then mick if your that obsessed, this is about the McCanns. Your presence on this board forms my opinion of you, but to be honest I couldn't care less. Like everyone else form Bolton your a boring arrogant chunt.

But lets stick to the subject of hte thread, the McCanns.

mickbrown Posted on 22/07/2008 16:28
The McCann's spokesman

Arrogant?

Au contraire, my deluded wordy friend.

By the way, what's a chunt?

Lefty Posted on 22/07/2008 16:28
The McCann's spokesman

I think they did it.

Boromart Posted on 22/07/2008 16:29
The McCann's spokesman

it's a swear-filter-avoiderer a bit like a cuunt....and don't call me a jawdee.

mickbrown Posted on 22/07/2008 16:29
The McCann's spokesman

What's a cuunt?

Boromart Posted on 22/07/2008 16:30
The McCann's spokesman

one of these


Link: NSFW chunt

mailinator Posted on 22/07/2008 16:32
The McCann's spokesman

Why are you posting large close-up pictures of female genitals with semen seeping from them?

Mick is right, you are the oddest person on this board.

Boromart Posted on 22/07/2008 16:32
The McCann's spokesman

well if he will ask a stupid question he will get a stupid answer.

mickbrown Posted on 22/07/2008 16:32
The McCann's spokesman

* Mental picture of Boromart complete.

Lefty Posted on 22/07/2008 16:33
The McCann's spokesman

Doesn't mean he's wrong though.

sasboro1 Posted on 22/07/2008 16:34
The McCann's spokesman

don't see how they could cover up any evidence and dispose of a body with not experienced in this sort of thing and with the media coverage on them at the time how could they get rid of a body.

boromart head on now[:)] maybe it is a police cover up and they tried to fit morat and the mccanns up and it is part of a child ring incolving some of the police. guilty until proven innocent. or maybe the child woke up went looking for mummy and ended up lost and is stuck somewhere never to be found.

lots of people go missing without trace always wonder where they end up.

Boromart Posted on 22/07/2008 16:34
The McCann's spokesman

mick are you gonna continue down this stupid childish avenue you appear to want to go down, or are you gonna discuss the topic of the thread? if it is the former then don't bother posting.

Boromart Posted on 22/07/2008 16:35
The McCann's spokesman

.

mickbrown Posted on 22/07/2008 16:37
The McCann's spokesman

Christ, I don't know where to start.


sasboro1 Posted on 22/07/2008 16:38
The McCann's spokesman

it is tongue in cheek, just using your idea of guilty until proven innocent.

Boromart Posted on 22/07/2008 16:40
The McCann's spokesman

"your idea of guilty until proven innocent"
That isn't what I said sas. You still don't get it.

"don't see how they could cover up any evidence and dispose of a body with not experienced in this sort of thing"

Well sas, if you do not believe that how can you believe that someone got into that apartment without anyone noticing, without leaving any trace and escaped without any witnesses? Just as unbelievable.


mickbrown Posted on 22/07/2008 16:41
The McCann's spokesman

Right, putting on my serial killer head, it's a piece of P*** to enter a room and leave no DNA. We're not slugs.

Boromart Posted on 22/07/2008 16:42
The McCann's spokesman

no it isn't and certainly not without being seen in a small time window.

mickbrown Posted on 22/07/2008 16:42
The McCann's spokesman

Course it is. You wear a pair of rubber gloves and shoes, which bit of you is going to leave DNA?

sasboro1 Posted on 22/07/2008 16:44
The McCann's spokesman

but still innocent. just because it is unexplained by the police does not mean they are guilty. some expert child snatcher might have gone in and able to do it without leaving evidence. or going on your theory the police might be a bit dodgy as they claim couldnt find any evidence and contaminated the crime scene.. by your theory there are plenty of other people guilty.

I am sure if it was the mccanns they would have left some evidence or been spotted. They are doctors not experts in kidnapping and murder.

mailinator Posted on 22/07/2008 16:44
The McCann's spokesman

I reckon I could enter a room and leave without leaving traces of DNA. All I have to do is not urinate, defecate, ejaculate, bleed, spit or touch anything without wiping it afterwards.

It ain't CSI FFS.

Big_Shot Posted on 22/07/2008 16:47
The McCann's spokesman

I agree that it would be fairly easy to enter a room and not leave any DNA behind, so I don't see why the banged on and on about the police letting the room get contaminated.

Boromart Posted on 22/07/2008 16:49
The McCann's spokesman

"You wear a pair of rubber gloves and shoes, which bit of you is going to leave DNA? " - hair. Your not exactly going to be inconspicuous with rubber gloves shoes and balaclava on in the middle of summer in portugal are you!

mickbrown Posted on 22/07/2008 16:51
The McCann's spokesman

Hair?

We don't have hair constantly falling off our bodies.

Boromart Posted on 22/07/2008 16:52
The McCann's spokesman

thats a good point big_shot. Anyone that argues that it is easy to go into a room and not leave DNA traces would also ask why the McCanns have banged on about contamination of the car they rented 5 weeks later and was found to have madelines blood in the boot.

Boromart Posted on 22/07/2008 16:54
The McCann's spokesman

hair falls out all the time mick, if you didn't wear headgear then there is a risk you leave a single strand behind....and if you have to hang around the bushes force the shutters and get through the window then there is a chance of snaggin hair.....this expert childsnatcher would surely not take such a risk.

mickbrown Posted on 22/07/2008 16:58
The McCann's spokesman

So because some random bloke's hair didn;t fall out they must have done it?

Bit tenous no?

Big_Shot Posted on 22/07/2008 16:59
The McCann's spokesman

I think thats what makes its such an interesting case. There is not much substance to any of it. It seems like the perfect crime, as there has been no evidence found at the time or since to suggest that a crime actually took place. Apart from a missing child of course.

mailinator Posted on 22/07/2008 17:03
The McCann's spokesman

Preserving the crime scene is a basic axiom of crime scene management. You preserve it. That doesn't guarantee evidence in it, but it would be reckless not to preserve the crime scene as you could damage any evidence there.

You can't say it doesn't matter about preserving the crime scene just because you accept there may be no evidence. That's extremely reckless, any person of the right mind would accept it is better to avoid damage to any evidence rather than just assume there is going to be none and think it'll do no harm.

Oh, and you can't extract a DNA match from hair as it is dead.


Boromart Posted on 22/07/2008 17:10
The McCann's spokesman

"It seems like the perfect crime, as there has been no evidence found at the time or since to suggest that a crime actually took place. " -- surely there is no such thing as the perfect crime, and that is why the finger was pointed back to the McCanns.

Am I correct in thinking that the front door to the apartment was locked, and there was no evidence of forced entry through the shutters. It is as if no one actually broke in.

There are a lot of very questionable facts around the case that do not add up.

Lefty Posted on 22/07/2008 17:11
The McCann's spokesman

'I reckon I could enter a room and leave without leaving traces of DNA. All I have to do is not urinate, defecate, ejaculate, bleed, spit or touch anything without wiping it afterwards.'

Yes, you would get away with a burglary in this country (and any other), but not necessarily a child abduction in this country because that would be treated like a murder scene. To get away with that, you would also have to ensure there was no transfer of fibres, loss of hair, footprints, ear prints etc. and the only way to be completely sure of that would be to wear the sort of overalls the police themselves use when investigating a scene. If you didn't do that, then you wouldn't leave DNA but you would perhaps leave those other signs that you had been there.

In Portugal though, at the McCanns apartment, you wouldn't have needed to be so thorough as the Portuguese Police bungled the initial crime scene investigation from a forensic point of view and they also botched the approach to the questioning of the parents as under Portuguese law the sort of subtle but direct questioning that our police would employ is prohibited unless the rather insensitive 'suspect' status was invoked first.


Boromart Posted on 22/07/2008 17:14
The McCann's spokesman

it's not just DNA anyway, there were no trace of fibre from clothing, no trace of chemicals which an abductor may use to drug a victim, no dusty/muddy footprints carried from the area where teh shutters were, nothing in the bushes, nothing.

mailinator Posted on 22/07/2008 17:16
The McCann's spokesman

BM, maybe there was before the evidence was trampled over by the police. Shame, like.

Big_Shot Posted on 22/07/2008 17:19
The McCann's spokesman

Presumably the reason why suspicion eventually pointed to the parent was because there was not one shred of evidence to prove anything happened. Thats why I say it seems like the perfect crime, as 14 months later there still is nothing.

Boromart Posted on 22/07/2008 17:21
The McCann's spokesman

'trampled by police' - that is what team McCann wold like you to believe. I fail to believe that a west european police force
couldn't even get the basics of protecting a crime scene correct. The McCanns have used the media to create enough doubt about the competance of the portuguese police.

But I guess when you have some of the best and most expensive lawyers in teh country on your team, like Michael Caplin then you can buy whatever form of justice you want. A la OJ.


Nice guys these two.....
Michael Caplan QC and Angus McBride
Two of the country's most high-profile solicitors, both work for City law firm Kingsley Napley. Mr Caplan specialises in international criminal law and has particular experience of extradition procedures, representing General Pinochet, the former Chilean dictator, in his attempt to avoid extradition from Britain to Spain on torture charges.

Mr McBride has represented several celebrities, including the England football captain John Terry, when he was alleged to have been involved in a pub brawl, and Chris Langham, the comedy actor who was convicted last month on child pornography charges. The company's website describes him as a specialist in "dealing with the media".

Carlos Pinto de Abreu

One of Portugal's top lawyers, he accompanied the McCanns during their marathon interviews with Spanish police. He was a prime mover behind legislation that has just come into force in Portugal giving the public more access to police documents during investigations. Officers investigating Madeleine's disappearance had been accused of using previous secrecy laws to conceal their slow progress.

mailinator Posted on 22/07/2008 17:23
The McCann's spokesman

"I fail to believe that a west european police force couldn't even get the basics of protecting a crime scene correct."

The same force that found her DNA in a hire car they hadn't even seen until a few weeks after her disappearance and then said that there might have been a bit of contamination? You're very trusting of the police.

onthemap Posted on 22/07/2008 17:23
The McCann's spokesman

Can't believe there's anything but sympathy for the McCanns. Some people are nothing more than heartless B******s.

Lefty Posted on 22/07/2008 17:33
The McCann's spokesman

'I fail to believe that a west european police force
couldn't even get the basics of protecting a crime scene correct.'

I've said this before, but I know that when this case first broke the news showed some footage of the Portuguese Police conducting the crime scene investigation and the SOCO's at Cleveland Police were watching it and their jaws collectively dropped at what they saw. It was apparent to them then that they were not competent at their job, probably never having had to deal with this sort of scene on any even remotely regular basis.

sasboro1 Posted on 22/07/2008 17:33
The McCann's spokesman

maybe it is a police cover up, but with it being such a high profile thing they could frame them.

Boromart Posted on 22/07/2008 17:36
The McCann's spokesman

sasd you can't accuse me of hanging the mccanns without evidence then likewise hang the portuguese police for 'framing the mccanns' without evidence.

I guess we will never know what happened to that poor little girl and the mccanns and the police will both be sullied by this case, one of them unfairly.

Lefty although there will be some truth in your SOCO mates views, british coppers like to speculate as much as anyone else, and they also like to think they are better at their job than people in other countries. Personally I would dillute that opinion rather than taking it at face value.

Lefty Posted on 22/07/2008 17:40
The McCann's spokesman

'Oh, and you can't extract a DNA match from hair as it is dead'

Not strictly true. You can get mitrochondrial DNA from the shaft of a piece of hair, which is the sequence from the mothers side. This reduces the probability of a match from 1 in 20,000,000 to more like 1 in 20,000. This would not match anything on a database or be enough to point the finger at anyone. Besides, it was a hotel room.

However, if there was any skin attached to the root of the hair or indeed any sweat, then a full DNA sample could be obtained.

sasboro1 Posted on 22/07/2008 17:40
The McCann's spokesman

i've just got my boromart head on. you would think that the police would have come up with something and in such a serious crime be more careful in their procedures. they seemed very shoddy. its so bad it is as if they want to mess it up [;)]

Jonny_Ingbar Posted on 22/07/2008 17:41
The McCann's spokesman

Whether the McCann's are guilty or not, one thing is for sure and thats the portuguese police have made an absolute dogs dinner of the investigation.

Boromart Posted on 22/07/2008 17:42
The McCann's spokesman

sas, stop being childish. You would have thought the police would come up with something (or at least something they would feel confident about getting a conviction with).....the fact they haven't tells us this case is not a straight forward abduction.

Lefty Posted on 22/07/2008 17:45
The McCann's spokesman

Actually, when it comes to crime scenes and forensics, the UK are way ahead of most of the rest of the world. Only Germany comes close. The USA is generally behind as well, though in some areas they have the money to throw at it.

You'll find that when other countries are looking to improve their police forces, it is the UK they come to for training and experts.


Boromart Posted on 22/07/2008 17:47
The McCann's spokesman

I'm sure that's true lefty, unfortunately the rest of the world isn't as good....but that shouldn't preclude all forensic and SOC evidence from other countries.

Interestingly a lot of the forensic work from the McCann case was done in the UK.

Lefty Posted on 22/07/2008 17:50
The McCann's spokesman

They called the UK in not just because of the British connection with the case, but because we are the best.


sasboro1 Posted on 22/07/2008 17:52
The McCann's spokesman

but they have come up with enough to make the mccanns guilty though just for being suspects but not for the other bloke [;)] as long as in boromart world you are guilty until proven innocent then we can all sleep well at night until the police come knocking asking us to prove our innocence on a crime down the street. you should work for the fa boromart.

so even the uk forensics could come up with anything?

Boromart Posted on 22/07/2008 17:54
The McCann's spokesman

Well the UK forensics still were not good enough for Team McCann who even claimed that the labels on the test samples could have been mixed up at the forensic labs or there was possible contimination between samples during testing....which is why their was a positive match.


Jonny_Ingbar Posted on 22/07/2008 17:54
The McCann's spokesman

"You would have thought the police would come up with something (or at least something they would feel confident about getting a conviction with).....the fact they haven't tells us this case is not a straight forward abduction"

Which crystal ball are you using?

Mojo Posted on 22/07/2008 17:56
The McCann's spokesman

ey Joe, that is shocking!
But you know social workers...can't do any wrong!

Boromart Posted on 22/07/2008 17:57
The McCann's spokesman

"boromart world you are guilty until proven innocent "

sas why do you argue like a child. You are incapable of reasoned debate. I have not said any such thing, by acting in this way you water down any possible kernel of sense in anything you post. I'm flattered that you want to turn this around into a thread about me, but I would rather stick to the topic.

Boromart Posted on 22/07/2008 17:58
The McCann's spokesman

Jonny I think you need to direct that question to Sas, I was responding to his earlier post.

Jonny_Ingbar Posted on 22/07/2008 18:00
The McCann's spokesman

Yes mate, sorry.

Comes from only being arsed to read the last few posts.

Boromart Posted on 22/07/2008 18:03
The McCann's spokesman

[:)] anyway goodnight all, my tea will be getting cold.

Lefty Posted on 22/07/2008 18:03
The McCann's spokesman


Sas, presumably you go along with the abduction by a stranger explanation. You do know what the odds are on that and does that scenario not raise even more puzzling questions than if the McCanns were guilty?

One of the biggest questions I would like answered is why Maddie was taken and not one of the twins, who would have been much easier to snatch and get away with. More valuable as well for a child porn ring, which let's face it, this must have been for such a professional, non clue leaving, job to have been done.

Any idea's lads?



sasboro1 Posted on 22/07/2008 18:05
The McCann's spokesman

come on boromart you were the one who was going on about they are guilty despite never being charged, i am just throwing it back at you by saying that other people could be guilty too if you go by your rules.

it is not about you it is about how you percieve people guilty on no evidence and based on someone looking to the left in an interview and on newspapers which were proved to have made the stories up. The mcCanns are completely innocent, no charges have been brought to them. I hope you never get to go on jury service because i can imagine you would have them guilty before the case started.

if you are tarring the mccanns with the brush of being guilty until proven innocent then you need to include morat and possible anyone in that hotel and so on. you are basing your opinion of guilty on no evidence and jsut on made up stories in the media.

so have you switched this discussion round so you can win now?

Jonny_Ingbar Posted on 22/07/2008 18:07
The McCann's spokesman

Lefty, if I had to guess from reading your threads you I would say you work for the police in some capacity? Not asking like, just an observation.

Anyway, the thing about stranger abduction is that it is exceptionally rare by all accounts, but then the danger is to dismiss it as a possibility because of this same reason?

sasboro1 Posted on 22/07/2008 18:26
The McCann's spokesman

lefty, i dont know what to think. all i know is that mccanns and morat are innocent as they couldnt find any evidence to make it worth while charging them. Who know, could be a local person who knows the hotel and area so knows how to get away unnoticed. from day 1 a lot of people on here assumed they were guilty but havent seen any one come back and admit they were wrong.

each year wonder how many people and kids in europe go missing without a trace. I'm sure the kid wasnt the first and wont be the last.

its all very sad and people treat it as some kind of tv programme and expecting an outcome with someone known getting charged. Too many people believing the stories the papers made up.

All we can hope is that they get their hands on the police files and get people to look into it and hopefully something comes up.

Boromart Posted on 22/07/2008 19:44
The McCann's spokesman

"it is not about you it is about how you percieve people guilty on no evidence "
I believe them guilty of something based on circumstantial evidence. the day you stop putting words into peoples mouths is the day you actually have a bit of credibility.

HolgateCorner Posted on 22/07/2008 19:46
The McCann's spokesman

Lefty - your comments are very interesting, like someone said you must be a senior copper.

Innocent or not of murder, the McCanns were undoubtedly guilty of neglect of Maddie.

That and their abnormal behaviour after she 'went missing' means a lot of people have little sympathy for them.


Jonny_Ingbar Posted on 22/07/2008 20:05
The McCann's spokesman

I said copper, not senior copper [;)]

HolgateCorner Posted on 22/07/2008 22:31
The McCann's spokesman

Jonny - apologies.

Lefty Posted on 22/07/2008 22:33
The McCann's spokesman

No lads, I'm not a copper.

I do know a few SOCO's, I know a fingerprint expert and I know someone who after about 12 years experience as a SOCO then became a Crime Scene Manager, is now an examiner for candidates who want to become a Crime Scene Manager - setting really nasty practical crime scenes - as well as an examiner/facilitator for the Forensic Science Diploma. When she did her Masters Degree - at Teesside Uni as it happens as that is one of the leading universities in the field of forensics - her thesis was on Sudden Infant Deaths/shaken baby syndrome.

She was also asked by one Police Force, after the Assistant Chief Constable read her thesis, to lead a conference to develop a co-ordinated approach to infant death investigations. The conference not only had all the senior Police Officers, CID and Crime Scene Officers from that force, but Forensic Scientists, Pathologists, and A&E doctors and nurses.

Outside of those directly involved with the McCann case there will be very few people in this country more qualified overall to comment on a case such as this as it should have been handled.

Most of the stuff I've written, on this thread and earlier ones, comes from many conversations I've had with her about this story. I actually gave her a call regarding the DNA from hair because I didn't think Trod was quite right.

A couple of things she has said.

The questioning of the parents/guardians as close to the incident is of paramount importance. There is a technique to it as obviously it is an extremely distressing time, but experience says the details of what is said initially is often crucial. That is why A&E doctors and nurses were asked to attend her conference for instances where they would be the first people in contact with the guardians following an 'accident'. As I understand it though, it was not possible under Portuguese law to direct such questions unless the McCanns were designated 'aguido' first, something that was not done.

Secondly, the scene should have immediately been treated as a murder scene with no body. From the TV evidence the crime scene investigation was not up to the required standard. The local portuguese police just do not have the experience an urban uk police force has.

The two points combined mean there was never a realistic probability of putting anyone in the frame without finding Maddie, or a confession.

Unfortunately, if this was a professional child abduction (and an amateur opportunist would surely have been caught or left clues), the heat generated by the publicity and Maddies distinctive eye means that she will almost certainly have been disposed of quickly.

mailinator Posted on 22/07/2008 23:16
The McCann's spokesman

Interesting stuff, Lefty. Never realised how much the so-called 'aguido' process has affected the early evidence gathering.


zaphod Posted on 23/07/2008 08:31
The McCann's spokesman

If Madeleine was anything like my daughter, it's perfectly possible she ran away (even at that young age). There wouldn't be any DNA in the room in that case.

The big problem with the parents being guilty is where would they hide the body in the time available?

There is middle ground. It is: I don't know one way or the other.