How come McCanns are quoted as being the people who are really suffering?

Quite a lot of commentators have commented that there is a difference between the celebrities appearing at the Levenson enquiry and the people who have really suffered and they always mention the McCanns, even before or instead of the Dowlers who really deserve our sympathy in my opinion.

I don't have a lot of sympathy for the celebrities, but The M's have courted the press, they weren't hacked and they had a case to answer which was why some sections of the press were putting forward theories. A lot of the press were very sympathetic.

How come they always get more sympathy than anyone else?

Tell me about it Suzyone! The aim of linking the McCanns with genuine victims of crime is simply to convey the impression that they too come into the same category and deserve the same sympathy. Thankfully not everyone is taken in by it but it's depressing that so many people are.

I feel sorry for those who do extend them their sympathy: It goes to show just how misguided even decent people (because, like us "Antis", the overwhelming majority are not Nutters - far from it) can become when sentiment pushes reason into a distant second place.

But there are McCanns who really do deserve sympathy: Madeleine herself and the Twins.

Why have so called celebrities such as Steve Coogan said that the McCann testimony was teh most important in the Leveson Enquiry? Wasn't the testimony of Milly Dowler's parent more important (particularly as they didn't need to speak out twice at an enquiry - Gerry gave evidence in 2009 remember)

suzyone wrote:Quite a lot of commentators have commented that there is a difference between the celebrities appearing at the Levenson enquiry and the people who have really suffered and they always mention the McCanns, even before or instead of the Dowlers who really deserve our sympathy in my opinion.

I don't have a lot of sympathy for the celebrities, but The M's have courted the press, they weren't hacked and they had a case to answer which was why some sections of the press were putting forward theories. A lot of the press were very sympathetic.

How come they always get more sympathy than anyone else?

Such are the benefits of having a government supplied lying mouthpiece and a public donated fund paying lawyers fees to keep their version of Madeleine's continued absence from the family home as the only one the papers dare print.

If the mccanns can tell rupert murdochs side kick to get cameron to send a letter back to the mccanns who in turn get the ball rolling I.e. the met to go to PDL to persuade the Portuguese police go give up files...What chance is there for justice....



Just WHO is In charge in downing street...WHO did we vote in....WHO tells WHO what to do.

I think this is why Gerry "sniggers" when asked about the dogs in the interview with Sandra F.

Both Gerry and Kate know they can do or say just about anything bar admitting culpability since they have complete protection.

This "jumping on the bandwagons" is just another form of brainwashing the public, they think that eventually we will just give up because all our protesting is not having any effect. We will be defeated by exhaustion. They and their "protectors" are able to continue for as long as it takes. However, as we see from Kate's face, it's taking it's toll. Gerry will maybe wear better. It's just a question of who breaks first. A confession or witness evidence is what we need.

Our mediaeval ancestors had some cute tricks to induce confessions.

The End Is Nigh

I wish, oh I wish!

kitti wrote:If the mccanns can tell rupert murdochs side kick to get cameron to send a letter back to the mccanns who in turn get the ball rolling I.e. the met to go to PDL to persuade the Portuguese police go give up files...What chance is there for justice....



Just WHO is In charge in downing street...WHO did we vote in....WHO tells WHO what to do.

If David Cameron wanted us to believe this review is going to be impartial and without a prior remit he should have had the sense not to give them the review the very next day after the McCanns' open letter in Murdoch's Sun.

kitti wrote:If the mccanns can tell rupert murdochs side kick to get cameron to send a letter back to the mccanns who in turn get the ball rolling I.e. the met to go to PDL to persuade the Portuguese police go give up files...What chance is there for justice....



Just WHO is In charge in downing street...WHO did we vote in....WHO tells WHO what to do.

If you have the right contacts and the right money you buy your own justice to suit yourself, across the board justice simply does not exist.

I don't believe their is 30 met offices doing a review ....it's all bullshit and talk and if this review is 'finished' before the trial then I will definately think it's all a con as this review will takes months if not years to go through everything and for them to check out eveything.


The met going to PDL were either to ask for ALL the files or makes it look like their doing something....and it was 3 met officers..

Well the silence from the Review is deafening - which, for once, is how it should be.

McCann and Healy will regret calling for the Review as their bluff was called and I'm of the opinion that most Policemen have the highest integrity and will look dispassionately (ie without an agenda) at all that has gone before.

Yet I also think that the Civil stuff with Amaral is going to be crucial as I cannot see the latter abandoning principle and settling out of Court. Surely one of his key motivations is to get McCann and Healy into a Court environment where they are unlikely to be able to get away with the machinations and obfuscation of the past?

Can't wait!

The End Is Nigh

I think our only hope of moving forward in finding out what really happened to Madeleine will be whatever the liable case turns up. I fear nothing will come of the Review. Too many hands on the files.

It is a pity that this is not happening in America - after watching the Murray trial, and Walgren examining the witnesses. If they didn't answer the question Walgren asked the Judge to admonish the witness! I loved it!

Admonishment, eh?

I might volunteer for that.

The End Is Nigh

gillyspot wrote:Why have so called celebrities such as Steve Coogan said that the McCann testimony was teh most important in the Leveson Enquiry? Wasn't the testimony of Milly Dowler's parent more important (particularly as they didn't need to speak out twice at an enquiry - Gerry gave evidence in 2009 remember)

He's obviously one of those normal citizens - you're one of those when you're not a nutter - that only knows what the headlines tell him and he's swallowed all their bullcrap.

I think the Dowlers evidence was the most important too, a reporter actually interferred with a murder inquiry what is more important than that?!

I have to agree with Alastair Campbell....the Mcanns sold Madeleine to the press as a "commodity" IMO.

I am heartily sick of hearing the name McCann quoted in the Leveson enquiry. Every day someone quotes it. It is very concerning that they have such support.
Madeleine is rarely mentioned only as the child of the McCanns.

Or, indeed, as the child of at least one of the McCanns.

Bobsy wrote:I am heartily sick of hearing the name McCann quoted in the Leveson enquiry. Every day someone quotes it. It is very concerning that they have such support.
Madeleine is rarely mentioned only as the child of the McCanns.

I have to agree with you Bobsy totaly sick of the...loved up poor McCanns SUPPORTERS WANTING CHEAP PUBLICITY, and people like Coogan forgetting about a couple of true grieving Parents like the Dowlers, all these attention seeking Z listers wanting to jump on the McCann bandwagon for there own gain imo....

My only solice is the fact that when the truth does comes out, how bloody foolish these loved up supporters will look for been sooo ignorant.

The End Is Nigh wrote:Or, indeed, as the child of at least one of the McCanns.

Care to share?

Lillyofthevalley wrote:

Bobsy wrote:I am heartily sick of hearing the name McCann quoted in the Leveson enquiry. Every day someone quotes it. It is very concerning that they have such support.
Madeleine is rarely mentioned only as the child of the McCanns.

I have to agree with you Bobsy totaly sick of the...loved up poor McCanns SUPPORTERS WANTING CHEAP PUBLICITY, and people like Coogan forgetting about a couple of true grieving Parents like the Dowlers, all these attention seeking Z listers wanting to jump on the McCann bandwagon for there own gain imo....

My only solice is the fact that when the truth does comes out, how bloody foolish these loved up supporters will look for been sooo ignorant.

Hello Lillyof the valley. Some of the truth is already available for people to read but they choose not to read it it seems. I really do fear that the whole truth will never come out. The many coats of whitewash will obliterate it imo and the McCanns and all their sick supporters will be jubilant, and Madeleine will be a photograph dusted when there are visitors to the house or another money making event is thunk up.

Bobsy wrote:

Care to share?

I seem to recall questions over biological parentage have come up several times in the past.

Not that it seems the most significant of issues - unless it impinges upon the apparent high-degree of protection our duo seem to have.

The End Is Nigh wrote:

Bobsy wrote:

Care to share?

I seem to recall questions over biological parentage have come up several times in the past.

Not that it seems the most significant of issues - unless it impinges upon the apparent high-degree of protection our duo seem to have.

Mmm, unless the father was an extremely important person, or it was a virgin birth then no it isn't significant. Certainly Gerry isn't an extremely imortant person, though he likes to think he is, and re the virgin birth "hotlipshealy" would tend to put that theory into question imo.