How can you say that ? Kate says it was an abduction and that should be quite enough for any right thinking person. We don't need recontructions or direspectful intrusive questioning by foreigners, it happened that way because they say so.
[I've always tried to avoid 'because I say so' whilst raising my daughter because it is so totally lame and frankly patronising to the recipient.]
Oh dear, I say it to my son quite a bit - he's 2!
Mind you, he's starting not to accept it now. Unfortunately for me, he needs a better answer, so I'm going to have to start coming up with them.
Indeed it does, but quoting a document in the public domain should not be against the law.
That throws up a few issues though.
Freedom to report what is in fact a private conversation given as a witness statement (also given in private).
If the injunction is brought by Payne or the McCanns we can think it unfair they are protecting themselves this way. But what if it was brought by the Gaspars* to protect themselves and their children and have their right to privacy upheld? Should we forget about that in our right to freedom? This is why things like this go to court to weigh up who has the greater right - the press to publish or the individual.
Well, at least that makes clear that your position is nothing to do with the facts or the truth, but only with blind support for someone regardless of whether they are right or wrong, and no matter how badly behaved they have been. Your choice, but don't mistake it for a credible 'take' on the case.
I don't just base my opinion on what Amaral has to say I base it on what other Police officers have said in this country and in Portugal.
I hope the dogs went two by two into the ark before it sailed majestically across the Garden of Eden, helmed by a dodgy looking foreigner travelling under the alias of Adam, but believed by authorities to actually be called Noah.
I hope the dogs went two by two into the ark before it sailed majestically across the Garden of Eden, helmed by a dodgy looking foreigner travelling under the alias of Adam, but believed by authorities to actually be called Noah.
Stop it! I spat my coca cola everywhere damn you! :mad::D
I see little sense in debating puerile analogies when I'm here to discuss specific questions about this case, such as why the cadaver dog barked in the McCanns apartment and nobody else's; why Kate McCann refused to answer basic questions; and why the McCanns have allowed their child's case to remain closed for years, despite - supposedly - thinking she's alive. {/quote]
Well 6/10 for bile, the argument is less satisfactory. KM did not refuse to answer 'basic questions' she refused to answer questions that were clearly intended to try and incriminate her, or build a case against the parents. GM did answer the questions. The Mccanns have not 'allowed' the case to remain closed, it was closed, there are legal restrictions on exactly how it could be re-opened.
Actually, like or loathe him, he has done a remarkably good job on his client's behalf. He has steered the media reporting for over 2 years, aided by Carter Ruck of course.
If he's done so well, why do people on the streets with no real interest in the case still don't believe his clients? Do you know of any journalist who respects him?
I hope the dogs went two by two into the ark before it sailed majestically across the Garden of Eden, helmed by a dodgy looking foreigner travelling under the alias of Adam, but believed by authorities to actually be called Noah.
Off to re watch Lost and try and get my mind off Madeleine all the other sad news out there.
Catch you all later guys, thanks for all your interesting posts and hard work. Take Care.
I see little sense in debating puerile analogies when I'm here to discuss specific questions about this case, such as why the cadaver dog barked in the McCanns apartment and nobody else's; why Kate McCann refused to answer basic questions; and why the McCanns have allowed their child's case to remain closed for years, despite - supposedly - thinking she's alive.
Well 6/10 for bile, the argument is less satisfactory. KM did not refuse to answer 'basic questions' she refused to answer questions that were clearly intended to try and incriminate her, or build a case against the parents. GM did answer the questions. The Mccanns have not 'allowed' the case to remain closed, it was closed, there are legal restrictions on exactly how it could be re-opened.
Thanks, but I'll mark my own work. Stick to your own.
Please demonstrate how the questions were "clearly intended to try and incriminate her".
How could they possibly incriminate an innocent person who was simply telling the truth? I'd genuinely be interested to hear what innocent answers Kate could give that would have incriminated her.
As I understand, simply taking part in the reconstruction could reopen the process - or are you suggesting the tapas friends are cruelly refusing to cooperate in this against the McCanns' wishes?
Comments
Oh dear, I say it to my son quite a bit - he's 2!
Mind you, he's starting not to accept it now. Unfortunately for me, he needs a better answer, so I'm going to have to start coming up with them.
*giggle*
That throws up a few issues though.
Freedom to report what is in fact a private conversation given as a witness statement (also given in private).
If the injunction is brought by Payne or the McCanns we can think it unfair they are protecting themselves this way. But what if it was brought by the Gaspars* to protect themselves and their children and have their right to privacy upheld? Should we forget about that in our right to freedom? This is why things like this go to court to weigh up who has the greater right - the press to publish or the individual.
[*I do not know who obtained the injunction]
I don't just base my opinion on what Amaral has to say I base it on what other Police officers have said in this country and in Portugal.
This is getting too much
I hope the dogs went two by two into the ark before it sailed majestically across the Garden of Eden, helmed by a dodgy looking foreigner travelling under the alias of Adam, but believed by authorities to actually be called Noah.
Like Kate's fingerprints on the shutter?
Heartbreaking.
On the other hand, if they had been trying to hide something, they would most certainly have changed it.
Stop it! I spat my coca cola everywhere damn you! :mad::D
If he's done so well, why do people on the streets with no real interest in the case still don't believe his clients? Do you know of any journalist who respects him?
Agree , but do you leave the boot open , because of the smell .
Or even just leave it open and up.
er, those are two different things as I'm sure you are aware.
They're from South Yorkshire
Tapas Cook Breaks Silence and talks about the McCanns
Not just British Yorkshire
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T3AmjQgS1KI&feature=related
I was thinking the same earlier today, before I saw this one. Poor little mites
Could be , but then we get back to the dogs..
Now you start saying: because Daddy said so !:D
Why of course! How does one get rid of the smell from the mobile latrine otherwise
I think you may be on to something there
Catch you all later guys, thanks for all your interesting posts and hard work. Take Care.
Thanks, but I'll mark my own work. Stick to your own.
Please demonstrate how the questions were "clearly intended to try and incriminate her".
How could they possibly incriminate an innocent person who was simply telling the truth? I'd genuinely be interested to hear what innocent answers Kate could give that would have incriminated her.
As I understand, simply taking part in the reconstruction could reopen the process - or are you suggesting the tapas friends are cruelly refusing to cooperate in this against the McCanns' wishes?