Mcanns under scrutiny

@bat wrote:

@fastcars wrote:

@bat wrote:

@fastcars wrote:

@ubermik wrote:

@fastcars wrote:

Im suprised Ubermick and Batty havent called the police about their feelings on this case. The Mcanns would have been hung drawn and quartered weeks ago if they had their way.

LOL, assuming guilt based on nothing but “feelings” is as moronically retarded as doing the same of innocence based on an equal vaccum of knowledge Fasty

So as much as you might think it would be wise to not interview them purely on “feelings” I niether thing it would be wise nor sane to punish them based on an equally lacking justification, I just dont think empathy,l sympathy and other eroneous nonsense should be cause to NOT investigate them as you would do anyone else, if they didnt do it then that would be proven, if they did, then they wouldnt really have cause to complain

What ever happened to innocent before proven quilty? You have, in your own pomous manner, slated this family from the word go with no thought to the fact that they might be completely and utterly innocent. I echo what Shazza says…. I hope the outcome of all this is the complete opposite from any of your wild assumptions and you are made to eat your (very) long and idiotic posts. Like pebbles says…. give the family a break… they have just lost a child!

Yes fasty, they have lost a child, and whose fault is that eh? It,s because of their negligence that all this bloody fiasco happened in the first place. Lets suppose for a minute, that whilst they were sitting in the bar, enjoying their cosy meal and a few drinks and a laugh with their friends, that one of the twins woke up crying for mum or dad. Tried the patio doors and, finding them open, wandered out, and across the road looking for mum and dad. A car came along and knocked them over. Would you have quite so much sympathy then? Whose fault would it be then eh? There,s for leaving 3 kids under the age of 4 in an unlocked apartment in the first place.

So which of you gossip mongers is correct then because between you you cant seem to decide if it was the front door that was left open or the patio doors.
But lets take Battys version of events that it was the patio doors as gospel.
Now looking at the photo that you yourself have posted Batty I would suggest that the patio doors lead out onto a balcony that is ringed by quite a large wall. The only possible people that may have access to this balcony “might” be the appartment adjacent but as far as I can see that would be it. There is certainly no way such a young child could escape which maybe explains why the family found it uneccessary to lock it. There is certainly no road anywhere in the vicinity as the appartment is at least two or three levels up so your exaggerated theory is exactly that. Exaggerated!

Fasty the patio doors were left unlocked so the parents could get in and out easly, thats a fact. You have completly missed the point I was trying to make, which was, IF, one of the kids had woken up and wandered out of the apartment, because of the doors being unlocked, and then got run over, would you be so quick to defend the negligent McCanns then? And yes there is a road in the vicinity, the bloody McCanns had to cross it to get to their cosy little resturant didnt they. :roll:

Did they really have to cross a road?? Because your picture suggests that the only thing between this restaurant and their appartment is a tiny hotel swimming pool. And before u suggest that a pool is just as dangerous I would find it very hard to belive that a three year old child could reach a hotel door handle… wandle down the coridoor… doubtless coming across more difficult door handles along the way. Then toddle down 3 flights of steps before eventually finding their way out to the outdoor swimming pool. And all this without being noticed by one single hotel occupant :roll:

@bat wrote:

@fastcars wrote:

@bat wrote:

@fastcars wrote:

@bat wrote:

@fastcars wrote:

@ubermik wrote:

@fastcars wrote:

Im suprised Ubermick and Batty havent called the police about their feelings on this case. The Mcanns would have been hung drawn and quartered weeks ago if they had their way.

LOL, assuming guilt based on nothing but “feelings” is as moronically retarded as doing the same of innocence based on an equal vaccum of knowledge Fasty

So as much as you might think it would be wise to not interview them purely on “feelings” I niether thing it would be wise nor sane to punish them based on an equally lacking justification, I just dont think empathy,l sympathy and other eroneous nonsense should be cause to NOT investigate them as you would do anyone else, if they didnt do it then that would be proven, if they did, then they wouldnt really have cause to complain

What ever happened to innocent before proven quilty? You have, in your own pomous manner, slated this family from the word go with no thought to the fact that they might be completely and utterly innocent. I echo what Shazza says…. I hope the outcome of all this is the complete opposite from any of your wild assumptions and you are made to eat your (very) long and idiotic posts. Like pebbles says…. give the family a break… they have just lost a child!

Yes fasty, they have lost a child, and whose fault is that eh? It,s because of their negligence that all this bloody fiasco happened in the first place. Lets suppose for a minute, that whilst they were sitting in the bar, enjoying their cosy meal and a few drinks and a laugh with their friends, that one of the twins woke up crying for mum or dad. Tried the patio doors and, finding them open, wandered out, and across the road looking for mum and dad. A car came along and knocked them over. Would you have quite so much sympathy then? Whose fault would it be then eh? There,s for leaving 3 kids under the age of 4 in an unlocked apartment in the first place.

So which of you gossip mongers is correct then because between you you cant seem to decide if it was the front door that was left open or the patio doors.
But lets take Battys version of events that it was the patio doors as gospel.
Now looking at the photo that you yourself have posted Batty I would suggest that the patio doors lead out onto a balcony that is ringed by quite a large wall. The only possible people that may have access to this balcony “might” be the appartment adjacent but as far as I can see that would be it. There is certainly no way such a young child could escape which maybe explains why the family found it uneccessary to lock it. There is certainly no road anywhere in the vicinity as the appartment is at least two or three levels up so your exaggerated theory is exactly that. Exaggerated!

Fasty the patio doors were left unlocked so the parents could get in and out easly, thats a fact. You have completly missed the point I was trying to make, which was, IF, one of the kids had woken up and wandered out of the apartment, because of the doors being unlocked, and then got run over, would you be so quick to defend the negligent McCanns then? And yes there is a road in the vicinity, the bloody McCanns had to cross it to get to their cosy little resturant didnt they. :roll:

Did they really have to cross a road?? Because your picture suggests that the only thing between this restaurant and their appartment is a tiny hotel swimming pool. And before u suggest that a pool is just as dangerous I would find it very hard to belive that a three year old child could reach a hotel door handle… wandle down the coridoor… doubtless coming across more difficult door handles along the way. Then toddle down 3 flights of steps before eventually finding their way out to the outdoor swimming pool. And all this without being noticed by one single hotel occupant :roll:

FFS give me bloody strength. Do I have to write this in punjabi before you get my point?
When I said about the kids getting out of the apartment that was just an example I was trying but failing dismally to show. IF, note, IF, they had got out and done what I suggested and ended up getting run over, would you have been so quick to defend the useless McCanns then? Or would you have thought, like the vast majority of us would, that they were grossly negligent in leaving the doors, unlocked in the first place. Geddit now? jeez, I,m worn out now. :roll: ](*,)

you would be surprised what 3 yr olds can do fasty if they are determined enough.

Fasty, I think you will find on examination I have never, not even once specified which door was left unlocked as I cant remember which one the Mcanns said they had left unlocked so that passers by could check on THEIR kids

Token, their IRresponsible actions ARE responsible for the opportunity for their child to be snatched unnoticed

So they are responsible for causing the abduction to have taken place whether they are invoilved more deeply than that or not

Thats easier to see with the car accident analogy really, suppose that had happened instead? Its not the childs fault is it? And it certainly wouldnt be the motorists fault if a 3 year old walked out from between parked cars

So that ONLY leaves the parents to blame for the scenario, just because the same actions resulted in a different method of her death doesnt alter their culpability for what they CHOSE to do with regards the safety of their children

There HAS to be some punishment for what is without doubt gross negligence to send out a message to parents that this kind of piss poor self absorbed parenting WONT be tolerated otherwise a lack of such a punishment will be contributary to more parents doing the same and taking their chances with their kids wellbeing if the message thats sent out instead is that you can be a miserable self absorbed excuse for a parent and you actually get sympathy for it rather than being made to accept your responsibility for what happens as a result

@pats wrote:

@bat wrote:

@fastcars wrote:

@bat wrote:

@fastcars wrote:

@bat wrote:

@fastcars wrote:

@ubermik wrote:

@fastcars wrote:

Im suprised Ubermick and Batty havent called the police about their feelings on this case. The Mcanns would have been hung drawn and quartered weeks ago if they had their way.

LOL, assuming guilt based on nothing but “feelings” is as moronically retarded as doing the same of innocence based on an equal vaccum of knowledge Fasty

So as much as you might think it would be wise to not interview them purely on “feelings” I niether thing it would be wise nor sane to punish them based on an equally lacking justification, I just dont think empathy,l sympathy and other eroneous nonsense should be cause to NOT investigate them as you would do anyone else, if they didnt do it then that would be proven, if they did, then they wouldnt really have cause to complain

What ever happened to innocent before proven quilty? You have, in your own pomous manner, slated this family from the word go with no thought to the fact that they might be completely and utterly innocent. I echo what Shazza says…. I hope the outcome of all this is the complete opposite from any of your wild assumptions and you are made to eat your (very) long and idiotic posts. Like pebbles says…. give the family a break… they have just lost a child!

Yes fasty, they have lost a child, and whose fault is that eh? It,s because of their negligence that all this bloody fiasco happened in the first place. Lets suppose for a minute, that whilst they were sitting in the bar, enjoying their cosy meal and a few drinks and a laugh with their friends, that one of the twins woke up crying for mum or dad. Tried the patio doors and, finding them open, wandered out, and across the road looking for mum and dad. A car came along and knocked them over. Would you have quite so much sympathy then? Whose fault would it be then eh? There,s for leaving 3 kids under the age of 4 in an unlocked apartment in the first place.

So which of you gossip mongers is correct then because between you you cant seem to decide if it was the front door that was left open or the patio doors.
But lets take Battys version of events that it was the patio doors as gospel.
Now looking at the photo that you yourself have posted Batty I would suggest that the patio doors lead out onto a balcony that is ringed by quite a large wall. The only possible people that may have access to this balcony “might” be the appartment adjacent but as far as I can see that would be it. There is certainly no way such a young child could escape which maybe explains why the family found it uneccessary to lock it. There is certainly no road anywhere in the vicinity as the appartment is at least two or three levels up so your exaggerated theory is exactly that. Exaggerated!

Fasty the patio doors were left unlocked so the parents could get in and out easly, thats a fact. You have completly missed the point I was trying to make, which was, IF, one of the kids had woken up and wandered out of the apartment, because of the doors being unlocked, and then got run over, would you be so quick to defend the negligent McCanns then? And yes there is a road in the vicinity, the bloody McCanns had to cross it to get to their cosy little resturant didnt they. :roll:

Did they really have to cross a road?? Because your picture suggests that the only thing between this restaurant and their appartment is a tiny hotel swimming pool. And before u suggest that a pool is just as dangerous I would find it very hard to belive that a three year old child could reach a hotel door handle… wandle down the coridoor… doubtless coming across more difficult door handles along the way. Then toddle down 3 flights of steps before eventually finding their way out to the outdoor swimming pool. And all this without being noticed by one single hotel occupant :roll:

FFS give me bloody strength. Do I have to write this in punjabi before you get my point?
When I said about the kids getting out of the apartment that was just an example I was trying but failing dismally to show. IF, note, IF, they had got out and done what I suggested and ended up getting run over, would you have been so quick to defend the useless McCanns then? Or would you have thought, like the vast majority of us would, that they were grossly negligent in leaving the doors, unlocked in the first place. Geddit now? jeez, I,m worn out now. :roll: ](*,)

you would be surprised what 3 yr olds can do fasty if they are determined enough.

:lol:

@ubermik wrote:

@ubermik wrote:

@pats wrote:

@bat wrote:

@fastcars wrote:

@bat wrote:

@fastcars wrote:

@bat wrote:

@fastcars wrote:

@ubermik wrote:

@fastcars wrote:

Im suprised Ubermick and Batty havent called the police about their feelings on this case. The Mcanns would have been hung drawn and quartered weeks ago if they had their way.

LOL, assuming guilt based on nothing but “feelings” is as moronically retarded as doing the same of innocence based on an equal vaccum of knowledge Fasty

So as much as you might think it would be wise to not interview them purely on “feelings” I niether thing it would be wise nor sane to punish them based on an equally lacking justification, I just dont think empathy,l sympathy and other eroneous nonsense should be cause to NOT investigate them as you would do anyone else, if they didnt do it then that would be proven, if they did, then they wouldnt really have cause to complain

What ever happened to innocent before proven quilty? You have, in your own pomous manner, slated this family from the word go with no thought to the fact that they might be completely and utterly innocent. I echo what Shazza says…. I hope the outcome of all this is the complete opposite from any of your wild assumptions and you are made to eat your (very) long and idiotic posts. Like pebbles says…. give the family a break… they have just lost a child!

Yes fasty, they have lost a child, and whose fault is that eh? It,s because of their negligence that all this bloody fiasco happened in the first place. Lets suppose for a minute, that whilst they were sitting in the bar, enjoying their cosy meal and a few drinks and a laugh with their friends, that one of the twins woke up crying for mum or dad. Tried the patio doors and, finding them open, wandered out, and across the road looking for mum and dad. A car came along and knocked them over. Would you have quite so much sympathy then? Whose fault would it be then eh? There,s for leaving 3 kids under the age of 4 in an unlocked apartment in the first place.

So which of you gossip mongers is correct then because between you you cant seem to decide if it was the front door that was left open or the patio doors.
But lets take Battys version of events that it was the patio doors as gospel.
Now looking at the photo that you yourself have posted Batty I would suggest that the patio doors lead out onto a balcony that is ringed by quite a large wall. The only possible people that may have access to this balcony “might” be the appartment adjacent but as far as I can see that would be it. There is certainly no way such a young child could escape which maybe explains why the family found it uneccessary to lock it. There is certainly no road anywhere in the vicinity as the appartment is at least two or three levels up so your exaggerated theory is exactly that. Exaggerated!

Fasty the patio doors were left unlocked so the parents could get in and out easly, thats a fact. You have completly missed the point I was trying to make, which was, IF, one of the kids had woken up and wandered out of the apartment, because of the doors being unlocked, and then got run over, would you be so quick to defend the negligent McCanns then? And yes there is a road in the vicinity, the bloody McCanns had to cross it to get to their cosy little resturant didnt they. :roll:

Did they really have to cross a road?? Because your picture suggests that the only thing between this restaurant and their appartment is a tiny hotel swimming pool. And before u suggest that a pool is just as dangerous I would find it very hard to belive that a three year old child could reach a hotel door handle… wandle down the coridoor… doubtless coming across more difficult door handles along the way. Then toddle down 3 flights of steps before eventually finding their way out to the outdoor swimming pool. And all this without being noticed by one single hotel occupant :roll:

FFS give me bloody strength. Do I have to write this in punjabi before you get my point?
When I said about the kids getting out of the apartment that was just an example I was trying but failing dismally to show. IF, note, IF, they had got out and done what I suggested and ended up getting run over, would you have been so quick to defend the useless McCanns then? Or would you have thought, like the vast majority of us would, that they were grossly negligent in leaving the doors, unlocked in the first place. Geddit now? jeez, I,m worn out now. :roll: ](*,)

you would be surprised what 3 yr olds can do fasty if they are determined enough.

:lol:

haha :lol:

This looks SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO funny with all the sequential quoting :lol: :lol: :lol:

I iz so easily amused I iz innit :oops: