BS: Child neglect and the law

Subject: RE: BS: Child neglect and the law
From: GUEST,Too much evidence
Date: 15 Sep 07 - 09:30 PM

"Many highly intelligent people are poor thinkers. Many people of average intelligence are skilled thinkers.
The power of a car is separate from the way the car is driven."
Edward de Bono

Subject: RE: BS: Child neglect and the law
From: Wolfgang
Date: 16 Sep 07 - 05:50 AM

Eanjay,

very good to spot that typo (replicated on may sites): "untie" is the word in the German original.

Trial by global gossip

The public, through the internet, can – and does – say anything, no matter how degrading or toxic, and keeps on saying it until, by a sort of insane osmosis, it stops being an outright lie and becomes a half-truth....
you can almost feel their quickening breath and their peculiar excitement as they comprehensively trash the reputation of a grieving woman ...
opinion dividing into people who see leaving a child as stupid, but not the world's greatest crime – such people are broadly sympathetic to the McCanns – and people who find it inexcusable, criminal and indicative of all sorts of dark possibilities.


Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Child neglect and the law
From: Jean(eanjay)
Date: 16 Sep 07 - 06:22 AM

Thanks Wolfgang.

Subject: RE: BS: Child neglect and the law
From: GUEST,Victor
Date: 16 Sep 07 - 06:35 AM

Well there you have it.

We could all find selective media reports Wolfgang to support what we believed happened.

If I "blue clicked" one of the numerous news reports I read and believed, no doubt you would be one of the first to dismiss it.

That article was rubbish by the way.

Subject: RE: BS: Child neglect and the law
From: Wolfgang
Date: 16 Sep 07 - 06:36 AM

I hope dearly some miracle would occur and the child would turn up safe somewhere, but I feel few hold hopes of such an occurrence. (Victor)

You hope but you feel that few others hope?

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Child neglect and the law
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 16 Sep 07 - 06:43 AM

Arrogant assumption of rectitude, and the offhand dismissal of any facts that disagree with ones own beliefs and/or theories, is the sign of a closed mind.
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: Child neglect and the law
From: Emma B
Date: 16 Sep 07 - 06:45 AM

I think many people hold hopes of a "miracle" but, in their hearts, I think the majority of people now grieve for this child.

Nevertheless a new advertizing campaign costing 80,000 euros has been launched by the family. Like eanjay I feel this money could be better spent some of the press (that we have all been so fond of quoting hehre) have suggested that this will, of course, deflect suspicion from the family again!

Subject: RE: BS: Child neglect and the law
From: GUEST,Victor
Date: 16 Sep 07 - 11:36 AM

Yes I would like to see the child found safe and well.

Yes I feel this is now unlikely as time pasts.

From what I have read, few people hold out hopes the child will turn up alive at this stage.

Yes I think the mother sedated the children so the couple could enjoy another social evening with friends.

Yes Wolfgang I hope.

No John I do not consider myself "Arrogant".

Next question or insult please.

I feel a new campaign has to be launched by the family as they cannot be seen to be sitting back doing nothing. Possibly advised to do this by their legal team or their PR team.

Regaining public support is stage one of any damage limitation exorcise.

Subject: RE: BS: Child neglect and the law
From: GUEST,Victor
Date: 16 Sep 07 - 11:39 AM

Even "Exercise" Sorry !

Subject: RE: BS: Child neglect and the law
From: Jean(eanjay)
Date: 16 Sep 07 - 11:46 AM

I feel a new campaign has to be launched by the family as they cannot be seen to be sitting back doing nothing. Possibly advised to do this by their legal team or their PR team.

This had crossed my mind and of course it's easy to do when none of your own money is involved.

Richard Branson has now started another fund for the legal costs.

I did find a link which says that the reporting is all out of perspective but I couldn't be bothered posting it. I also found a link that accuses them of much worse than anything you have said, Victor - but I'm not posting that either.

I doubt that a lot of us would even have heard about poor little
Ylenia Lenhard if they hadn't been looking to see if her disappearance had anything to do with Madeleine McCann's. Her body has now been found.

The whole thing is making me more cynical than I usually am!

Subject: RE: BS: Child neglect and the law
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 16 Sep 07 - 12:00 PM

Yes, everyone hopes that Madeleine will turn up.

Some people suspect that the parents might have sedated here and caused her death. Others have pointed out that this is a speculative hypothesis, and that there is no clearcut evidence for it in the public domain (rumours and gossip are merely rumours and gossip, even when they are passed on by journalists.

I am sure that everyone hopes that the parents are not guilty of the death of their daughter.

Not really that much difference between us, where it matters, when we come down to it. We just need to accept that we just don't know - none of us.

Subject: RE: BS: Child neglect and the law
From: GUEST, heric
Date: 16 Sep 07 - 12:25 PM

I don't know if there are people who want to see "that woman" brought down, in the hopes of finding a witch, any witch, for burning at the stake. I suppose people do crazy things, but I would't accuse anyone here of that. I don't even understand why or how it is switching to "that woman" rather than the McCanns, if it has. (Perhaps, with pure speculation, that arose from an interrogation technique of trying to divide the parents.)

Another reason to find this interesting is that what (we thought) the police had accused them of is amazing/remarkable/fantastic under the situation: That two people, in a crowded resort, surrounded by many acquantances, could immediately coordinate a massive fraud when presented with an unexpected accident, and then take that cover up to the greatest heights imaginable. All with no pre-planning.

Turns out, of course, that the police really haven't accused them of anything, we were just led to that understanding by the Portugese tabloids and, surprisingly, the McCanns themselves.

Subject: RE: BS: Child neglect and the law
From: GUEST,Victor
Date: 16 Sep 07 - 12:31 PM

I agree, none of us know with certainty McG.

Expressing our viewpoints in a civil manner and exchanging possibilities is not a crime, well to some here it is.

I have also read some of the posts on other forums eanjay. I haven't posted on them. There is a lot of anger out there, this comes from unanswered questions and the behaviour of the parents.

Maybe some of our more vocal name callers here could visit them and sort them out ?

Nothing any of us here say can bring the case to a conclusion or place the parents before a judge and jury, we are only expressing our views, just as dozens of other members/guests do here daily on subjects ranging from the Iraq war, George Bush, the right to hold firearms to why we had no bloody summer !

Can I ask those who steam in with jaws blazing the following questions.

Do you feel convinced the child was abducted ?

Are you totally convinced the parents are innocent ?

Are you happy with all the answers the McCann's gave to questions posed to them ?

Is my belief that the mother gave the children sedation and this child had an adverse reaction to it and died, and that Gerry McCann in an attempt to save their careers and a public outcry covered the events of a tragic mistake so far fetched ?

I am not saying hey are monsters, save the name calling for me.

Subject: RE: BS: Child neglect and the law
From: Jean(eanjay)
Date: 16 Sep 07 - 12:39 PM

I have also read some of the posts on other forums eanjay. I haven't posted on them. There is a lot of anger out there, this comes from unanswered questions and the behaviour of the parents.

Victor, the link I was referring to was actually another newspaper dated today!

Turns out, of course, that the police really haven't accused them of anything, we were just led to that understanding by the Portugese tabloids and, surprisingly, the McCanns themselves.

Exactly - but in this case there seems to be one rule for some and a different rule for others!

Subject: RE: BS: Child neglect and the law
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 16 Sep 07 - 12:49 PM

It's like the eedjits that run the EEC! Oh yes lets all discuss it, then put it to the vote, that's the fairest way.
"WHAT, you voted no, I'm sorry but you were supposed to vote yes"
OK we will ask the same question again, same words different order, just so as you think it's a different question when it isn't really.
If you vote no again, we will keep putting the same question in a slightly different format, until you say yes.

That in a nutshell is what you are doing Victor. You are acting as 'agent provacateur' in this matter, having quite made up your own mind that the parents are guilty.
As I have said previously, along with others, we none of us know what's happened.
The parents may be guilty of murder, they may only be guilty of not looking after their children according to the law.
It is not our job to try them, nor yet to pronounce them guilty.
It is not you I am attacking it is you assumptions.
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: Child neglect and the law
From: Jean(eanjay)
Date: 16 Sep 07 - 12:50 PM

more reporting

Subject: RE: BS: Child neglect and the law
From: Jean(eanjay)
Date: 16 Sep 07 - 12:52 PM

I don't think Victor is trying to get us all round to his way of thinking at all - he's just stating his opinion and sticking up for himself.

Subject: RE: BS: Child neglect and the law
From: Peace
Date: 16 Sep 07 - 12:56 PM

I thnik everyone oughta take a day off.

Subject: RE: BS: Child neglect and the law
From: Peace
Date: 16 Sep 07 - 12:56 PM

That's what I thnik.

Subject: RE: BS: Child neglect and the law
From: Jean(eanjay)
Date: 16 Sep 07 - 12:57 PM

Best suggestion yet.

Subject: RE: BS: Child neglect and the law
From: Wolfgang
Date: 16 Sep 07 - 01:04 PM

The problem with you, Victor, is that you are a bit slow in understanding.

My last post just was making fun of the way you used the word "hope" in tow very different senses in one sentence.
The post before that linked to an opinion article not dealing with facts in any way (except being open minded about them), but with our, the public's, reaction to what we read. Try to understand the difference between facts and opinion. I dearly hope you do but I have little hope you do.

...selective media reports ... to support what we believed happened
Yes that's your way, most others here don't play the guessing game with little real information. I don't. But those few who do like you fit each bit of information they read into one scenario:
The McCanns don't search all over Europe like they did initially? Well, that only shows they know that the kid cannot be found. The McCann's restart searching? Well that only shows they try to detract the attention of those suspecting them.

It is not your opinion that makes you (and not others with similar opinions) a target here, Victor, it is the stupid way you argue. Like asking a stupid question as whether someone feels totally convinced the parents are innocent. I know I should only answer for myself but none here will answer unconditionally yes. It is one possible scenario, nothing else.

Are you happy with all the answers...?, is a similarly stupid question with only one possible answer. Start debating in a meaningful way and no one will jump on you for an opinion even if they tend to disagree with that opinion.

Try to realise that those who are not as convinced as you are that the parents are guilty do not try to select facts in support of one particular scenario like you do, but only try to support a particular way of debating by linking to articles about the debate and rather not (or rarely) to articles about facts.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Child neglect and the law
From: Sorcha
Date: 16 Sep 07 - 01:09 PM

I'm taking a day off. Great idea, Peace.

Subject: RE: BS: Child neglect and the law
From: heric
Date: 16 Sep 07 - 02:00 PM

Fine summary of the facts and factlets to date, dated and sourced, is here , in the Irish Times.

Wednesday is D-day.

Subject: RE: BS: Child neglect and the law
From: Emma B
Date: 16 Sep 07 - 03:09 PM

"hope" is defined in my dictionary as
1 confident expectation that something desired may happen
and
2 expectation which has little chance of fulfilment

I fail to see any reason for poking fun at Victors's statement his meaning was obvious to all!

In addition Victor has been consistent throughout that he is expressing his "opinion" and has been open enough about his personal life to allow us to appreciate the origins of this opinion.

Now I'm content to give this whole tragic situation a "rest" as Peace has suggested (unlike the world's media) but I will defend someone's right to express non-malicious opinions without insult and artful attempts to suggest stupidity!

Subject: RE: BS: Child neglect and the law
From: GUEST,Victor
Date: 16 Sep 07 - 03:18 PM

Wolfgang I repeat, you are entitled to your opinions.

Please keep your amateur psychology evaluations for those who care to read to them.

I myself don't feel the need for in-depth psychological assessments of my personality or thought pattern.

Possibly your time would be better served creating some heart wrenching thread which would give you the much needed public ovation and acclaim you so clearly require.

I don't consider myself slow on the up take Wolfgang, in fact I am very switched on to motivations of some individuals.

Subject: RE: BS: Child neglect and the law
From: Jean(eanjay)
Date: 16 Sep 07 - 03:19 PM

Now I'm content to give this whole tragic situation a "rest" as Peace has suggested (unlike the world's media) but I will defend someone's right to express non-malicious opinions without insult and artful attempts to suggest stupidity!

Agreed.

Have a good evening all.

Subject: RE: BS: Child neglect and the law
From: GUEST,Victor
Date: 16 Sep 07 - 03:31 PM

Emma, you only have to read through some of Wolfgangs posts on other threads to see his attempts to belittle, insult by insinuation or imply his superiority or vast expanse of knowledge on a host of other subjects.

Thanks for your understanding, but I have met his type before.

I only express my opinions and state what I believe happened in this this case. I really would prefer to think of myself to be above personal insult and allow others to state their views of a very public case.

Some of the threads concerning the Iraq war or the politics of America allow viewpoints and assessments, something clearly not extended to me here.

Subject: RE: BS: Child neglect and the law
From: heric
Date: 16 Sep 07 - 03:38 PM

See you Wednesday then!

Subject: RE: BS: Child neglect and the law
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 16 Sep 07 - 03:53 PM

I've found myself arguing with Wolfgang on other threads about various subjects. I've never been aware of "attempts to belittle, insult by insinuation" and so forth. Just of someone who is very committed to sticking to the demonstrable facts, and well able to spot holes in an argument.

Those are qualities which are not met with in an opponent all that often, and I value them.

This of course is thread drift. I would suggest that if anyone feels like turning the discussion to these kinds of issues - techniques of argument etc - it would be better to do so in a separate thread. Perhaps providing a link to it from here.

Subject: RE: BS: Child neglect and the law
From: Alice
Date: 16 Sep 07 - 04:04 PM

Wolfgang is pointing out the difference between facts and opinion.

The subject of child neglect is very emotional and sometimes it is hard to
stick to facts and be objective with an emotional subject like this one.

Subject: RE: BS: Child neglect and the law
From: akenaton
Date: 16 Sep 07 - 04:07 PM

I agree with McGrath Wolfgang and I are far apart politically but I admire his understanding of statistics and his refusal to bash people around with "facts"

Subject: RE: BS: Child neglect and the law
From: heric
Date: 16 Sep 07 - 04:20 PM

May I politely request that we not start taking votes as to whether Victor is slow and stupid or Wolfgang is insulting? That will certainly kill the thread.

Really - a break until the judge speaks on Wednesday might be beneficial.

Subject: RE: BS: Child neglect and the law
From: Emma B
Date: 16 Sep 07 - 04:28 PM

Thank you heric, not too much argueing with reference to or understanding of either "statistics" or "facts" demonstrated by some folks here

Adéu

Subject: RE: BS: Child neglect and the law
From: Jeanie
Date: 16 Sep 07 - 04:29 PM

From what I hear, we will not have to be waiting until Wednesday. Big news apparently going to break tomorrow (Monday) - press has been silenced over the weekend. More information on the Mirror forum for those that wish to see.

- jeanie

Subject: RE: BS: Child neglect and the law
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 16 Sep 07 - 05:12 PM

More information on the Mirror forum

"information"? Well, perhaps...

Subject: RE: BS: Child neglect and the law
From: Jeanie
Date: 16 Sep 07 - 05:31 PM

"Information ? Well, perhaps"....Agreed, McGrath, I forgot to add the all-important caveat of *allegedly*, although, if you are discerning, there are some people on there who I have found to have provided more genuine inside knowledge than others, ahead of the published/broadcast news, over the past months.

- jeanie

Subject: RE: BS: Child neglect and the law
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 16 Sep 07 - 05:50 PM

A quote about this case that I think sums things up rather well. It comes from Linda Chamberlain-Creighton, who was jailed for killing her child in the Australian dingo baby case. Falsely accused and wrongly jailed, as it eventually turned out, after she'd spent long years in prison:

"It is as if we have run over the hour allotted for the 'show' and the viewers are saying: 'Where's the answer? When the public atmosphere is like this, questions of justice or truth start to take second place."

Subject: RE: BS: Child neglect and the law
From: Peace
Date: 16 Sep 07 - 08:39 PM

What's wrong with this picture?

Subject: RE: BS: Child neglect and the law
From: Emma B
Date: 16 Sep 07 - 08:46 PM

Nothing Peace I'm afraid! both tits and titilations sell "news" in the UK

Subject: RE: BS: Child neglect and the law
From: Peace
Date: 16 Sep 07 - 08:47 PM

Thought it was a phone book.

Subject: RE: BS: Child neglect and the law
From: Jeanie
Date: 17 Sep 07 - 03:47 AM

That's a very apt quote, McGrath. I'm a bit old to have finally woken up to this, but having seen the way the media has handled this case (and not just the tabloids, either, but the so-called "quality press"), I will find it very difficult to ever again trust that the "news" I am presented with by press and TV bears any close resemblance to truth.

If this case ever does come to trial in Portugal, I am not sure whether they have a jury system over there. The media manipulation that has taken place in this case would be a very strong argument for a lawyer to suggest that a jury would find it difficult to make an unbiassed decision.

- jeanie

Subject: RE: BS: Child neglect and the law
From: GUEST,Wolfgang
Date: 19 Sep 07 - 02:20 PM

Another case that weeks ago has been mentioned in the press in connection with Madeleine McCann has found the not unexpected sad end: Ylenia Lenhard's body has been found.

The never corroborated connection was that Ylenia's most likely murderer, Hans Urs von Aesch, lived in Spain at the time of Madeleine's disappearance and "might have" been in Portugal. This connection never left the "might have" status as far as I know.

Ylenia Lenhard fits also the theme of this thread. A 5 and 1/2 year old girl cyles alone to the local swimming pool and never comes back. Her mother reared the child on her own and rather often allowed Ylenia to do things on her own. I can understand she did that but I'm sure she's devastated now.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Child neglect and the law
From: katlaughing
Date: 19 Sep 07 - 02:41 PM

I would never allow a 5.5 year old to venture anywhere alone.

Subject: RE: BS: Child neglect and the law
From: heric
Date: 19 Sep 07 - 02:58 PM

According to Sky News the McCanns will not be questioned, AND: "This means that the investigation file has come back from the judge to the prosecutors with his comments."

In other words, we apparently don't get to hear any pronouncements from Judge Frias.

Subject: RE: BS: Child neglect and the law
From: Jean(eanjay)
Date: 19 Sep 07 - 03:06 PM

Heric, I'm sure I read today that he is expected to make the pronouncements tomorrow. I could have got it wrong though.

Subject: RE: BS: Child neglect and the law
From: Jean(eanjay)
Date: 19 Sep 07 - 03:19 PM

I've found the link for my last post.

where I read it

Subject: RE: BS: Child neglect and the law
From: Jean(eanjay)
Date: 19 Sep 07 - 04:29 PM

Wolfgang, I mentioned Ylenia Lenhard in my post on 16 September 11.46am. You're right, it does fit this theme, someone so young cycling to the swimming pool on her own. Presumably she was going to use the pool on her own as well?

I think its interesting that her body may not have been found if her murderer had not shot somebody else and then killed himself. Apparently a member of the public continued looking in the woods once the police had given up, and he found her.

Perhaps if her killer has any connection with Madeleine's disappearance then the police may have more chance to discover that now that they have found her body.

Very sad.

Subject: RE: BS: Child neglect and the law
From: GUEST,Wolfgang
Date: 20 Sep 07 - 06:08 AM

My mistake, eanjay. I did a search on the thread whether Ylenia had been mentioned and must have mistyped the name to overlook your post.

Von Aesch may be responsible for several murders and disappearances the police thinks. While he was living in Thurgau, a Swiss Canton, there were several murders and disappearances of little girls that stopped when he moved to Spain. But all those are just guesses with no evidence yet, other than in Ylenia's case.

Kat, would you let an 8 year old girl walk alone for 1 km (2/3 of a mile) in a big City? That is in Germany the newest disappearance case with no body yet but an arrested suspect?

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Child neglect and the law
From: GUEST,Wolfgang
Date: 20 Sep 07 - 07:54 AM

Ylenia's mother in an interview today (my translation):
Q: Are you blaming yourself?
A: Blaming myself? There is no need for that. She (Ylenia) isn't to blame and neither am I. She was just at the wrong time at the wrong place. But still one asks oneself questions: If it had rained that day she wouldn't have fetched the shampoo (she had forgotten the shampoo at the pool the day before. W.). For it was her idea not mine. She said spontaneously: "Shall I fetch it?" And I said: "Yes, fine". Five minutes later she went. Yes, if it had rained or if the shampoo would have been empty, then she'd be still alive.

(The pool was 1 km away from her home)

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Child neglect and the law
From: Jean(eanjay)
Date: 20 Sep 07 - 08:04 AM

Thanks for posting that part of the interview, Wolfgang. I hadn't seen any of it.

It is amazing what convenient minds people who are irresponsible in their parenting have. I'm sure I would be riddled with guilt and in need of counselling for years!