can someone clear this up ? (yes mccanns again)

I think you’re looking at the bottom four paragraph’s of this article Mary. :wink:

http://www.express.co.uk/ourcomments/view/19125

The date of Sep 14 is the giveaway for the Friday thing.

Since they said it in a recorded interview I’d doubt it’s speculation.

Where have I said that the McCanns were Guilt Free? How do you know I said that? Were you there?

On the contrary. I’ve said they made a mistake leaving their kid’s alone. No where have I ever said any differently.

On all of the televised statements and interviews their statements on them leaving the kids alone were at best pathetic, their wording revolved around phrases like “we were naive” and “we made a silly mistake” or my favourite “we had a lapse in judgement” :shock:

Their wording and tone would have seemed right at home IF they had actually been talking about something like assuming tinned tomato soup didnt need sieving to check for lumps as it SHOULD be totally liquified, one of which had then choked maddy to death

Thats naiveity, thats a “silly mistake” as its reasonable to assume it wouldnt need sieving, but leaving three toddlers alone just isnt done justice by such wishy washy sentiments in the slightest

And its that very dismissive insufficient levels of realisations of the magnitude of just how irresponsibly and abhorrently selfishly neglectful they were

Had they used words such as “irresponsibly and abhorrently selfishly neglectful” more people would have far more respect and a lot more of an inclination to believe them I reckon,

but as their actual tone is a very dismissive non serious one concerning the matter of leaving the kids and the complicity in doing so re her abduction IF thats what has happened it creates a very real and very easy to understand negative view of them, and their apparent lack of depth of feelings of guilt, irresponsibility, selfishness, complacency, complicity and downright neglegtful actions opens the quite reasonable speculation to what other areas they could be equally morally vaccuous and lacking in empathethic sentiments and feelings

As I have been saying from the beginning, as small a point as that might seem it does, to me at least, suggest the quite distinct possibility that they could both be to some greater or larger extent sociopathic in their emotional understanding and feelings towards situations, people and detached from the world in general

And also that they have been wasting money on their “campaign advisors” who should have picked this sentiment up instantly and told them to fake guilt and remorse to a reasonable extent over the matter of leaving the kids alone instead of talking about it as tho it was merely them leaving a tv on standby that then started a fire that killed her because the baby sitter had been asleep and the smoke alarm batteries had been flat as that COULD be deemed naiveity and a silly mistake, deliberately leaving three kids alone isnt, in any reasonable persons view so trivial, accidental or non serious tho

@forumhostpb wrote:

@Bad Manners wrote:

I think you’re looking at the bottom four paragraph’s of this article Mary. :wink:

http://www.express.co.uk/ourcomments/view/19125

An interesting article BM. The bit you refer to I think is:

An interview with Mr and Mrs McCann was released yesterday in which they spoke about being under the “magnifying glass of suspicion”, claiming: ‘If we can get though this we can get though anything’.

In it they admit their guilt at leaving their “perfect child” alone. But they deny all claims of being involved in Madeleine’s disappearance.

“Of course we feel guilty at being at the restaurant when she disappeared,” said Kate. But she added: “That will always be so, but the person who broke in and took Madeleine is the most guilty.”

I think that the quote “If we can get though this we can get though anything” should have read “If we can get away with this we can get away with anything.”

I also note that whilst they make a half-hearted attempt to accept their personal responsibility (“… of course we feel guilty…”) they immediatly seek to shift the blame onto somebody else (“…the person who broke in and took Maddie is the most guilty”).

Leaving aside my own belief that they are a pair of callous cold-hearted manipulators …. wothout doubt THEY are the most guilty – it simply wouldn’t have happened at all if they had discharged their parental responsibilities and looked after their children properly…..

…. assuming that you buy into their half-baked and unbelievable story in the first place.

My personal interpretation of that passage is this

““Of course we feel guilty at being at the restaurant when she disappeared” said Kate”

Shouldnt they have actually have simply felt “guilt” at leaving her alone? Whether or not she was abducted?

The wording of that shows very little if any actual guilt or acceptance that they have done wrong by leaving their kids, simply that by sheer bad luck some selfish peasant stole one of their “fashion accessories”

It doesnt to me show any actual guilt, it doesnt even show a very convincing facade of pretending to be guilty, its too flat, isnt self effacing enough and just rings of a “matter of fact” re-iteration of what they think others are thinking but without any convincing level of conviction or believability

. But she added: “That will always be so, but the person who broke in and took Madeleine is the most guilty.”

Now this is interesting, what break in? They are. as has been a common factor in this conveniently skipping over quite pivotal details perhaps in the hopes people reading will be too retarded to realise. The apartment wasnt locked, there wasnt a break in, and more importantly there wasnt even a reason not to have locked the apartment, IF as were expected to believe they were in the slightest bit concerned for or paying attention to their kids safety and well being. Infact had the door been locked the alleged abductor might have walked on by not bothering to risk the noise of a break in which also would have removed the risk of one of the kids waking up and being able to simply wander off

Ittespective of displays of grief, as sociopaths wouldnt have those anyway. They SHOULD have a much better understanding of the gravity of their trail of blatant errors and stupidity and should also be (if genuine) more self critical and self effacing

But obviously if they are complicit in her dissapearance any nudge in the direction of their guilt with any real vigor would be avoided completely due to the strategic problems with it

But to non sociopaths the emotional rather than the logical is prevalent in such situations, and strategy accounts for nothing other than an appearance of clear avoidence of particular areas of speculation which wouldnt be quite so readily avoided by innocent people, not even innocent sociopaths as they would assume they dont need to avoid the areas as their actual innocence was unnavoidably incontrivertible

Guilty sociopaths tho, they would seek to consistently nudge in any other direction available