madeleine mccann was not abducted because she was left in a hotel room

[rattleskuttle]

ok, i'm probably going to regret this - but i am dismayed to see the same old arguments coming up again and again about whether the mccann's were irresponsible to leave their children unsupervised in a hotel room.
it seems to be the same people posting too.
if they had taken her with them she could have still been abducted while running around while they were having their meal. i doubt they could have watched a 3yr old every second and she could have been snatched while out of sight, as happened to jamie bulger.

the person responsible is the one who abducted her, and if, sadly, it is anything to do with paedophilia, then all those people who support the industry in child porn by watching and paying for the stuff also bear some responsibility.

www.forsarah.com/html/sarahslaw.html perhaps we could all be doing something to try and stop it.

[SoupDragon]

Agree 100%

[SoupDragon]

I don't think this was opportunistic abduction, it was planned. They would have found an opportunity at some point.

[Bouj]

Also agree. They targeted her, they wanted her, they were going to take her regardless. We all at some point make decisions that leave our children vulnerable.

[Bouj]

Also think that by labelling them irresponsible, people feel that they are immune to something like this happening. That they can breathe a sigh of relief, because they never would have made that decision.

[expatinscotland]

PARP!

[GrumpyOldHorsewoman]

OK, I've resisted even looking at any of these threads, but have to say I agree.

If her parents had been asleep in the next room when she was abducted, would anyone have blamed them then? Or is it expected that one parent watches sleeping children whilst other parent sleeps, then they switch shifts? Utter nonsense. Her abductor is to blame, her parents are suffering enough.

I'm going to bow out now, before it descends into another row.

[doggiesayswoof]

Agree with OP and


PARP

[Hulababy]

I agree. Seems much more likely to have been planned rather than opportunist. She was targetted I think, so could have happened at any time on that holiday.

Only person to blame IMO is the person who took her.

[LIZS]

I agree and no amount of "they shouldn't"s and "I wouldn't"s have or will change the present sad situation.

[Diplidophus]

Absolutely!

[Thelittlesoldiersmummy]

I hadnt really thought about it this way I do think it was silly to leave them in the room alone but I do agree that she was targeted and they would have tried to take her no matter what!

[BreeVanDerCamp]

Agree

[JolieGirl]

Why does it matter? The bottom line is she is gone and has not been found. These threads raking over the same old ground are getting on my wick.

[expatinscotland]

Wait 5 minutes, we'll have a new thread with an OP dissenting view.

Yawn!

[ELF1981]

I agree with the OP but...

There seems to be a lot of jumping on people who are expressing they are surprised/ saddened that children of that age were left alone.
I do not think anybody has suggested that she was taken because she was on her own, but it seems wrong for (not this thread but others) people to try and have a go at those who are shocked by children being left alone.

[Chandra]

I think that Rattleskuttle was trying to get attention to the possibility of doing someting to prevent this incidents by signing the Sarah's Law petition.

[nailpolish]

god, the mccanns must be going insane wondering why their wee girl was targeted, if this abduction was planned and they believe it was planned.

[drosophila]

Are we sure she was abducted and didn't wander off. I haven't been following it that intently but wondered if there was deffo a sign of entry etc...

[crazylazydaisy]

rattleskuttle - that link wont accept my signing up! Any idea why? Also it says it's to David Blunkett - is this right as I thought he was long gone (sorry if it's me not being up to speed with politics!)

[doggiesayswoof]

Eek - should have said I agree with OP except for the Sarah's Law bit - won't be signing that

now really parp

[kslatts]

What does PARP mean?

[gonnaneedabiggerboat]

Totally agree.

I was listening to Nick Ferrari on LBC this morning (I had to turn it off faily quickly before I screamed) and the latest thing they're going on about is the fact that the parents are seeing the Pope today but they've left the twins behind and how could they (Not my opinion by the way - I personally think they've done the right thing by trying to not disturb their routine any more than they have to)

I think that until Maddy is found (an long after) people are always going to comment on what happened

[nogoes]

I don't agree with you. I am not criticising the McCann's but I do believe that it is unlikely she would have been abducted if she had not been left alone in the room. The abductor was watching them and knew their movements etc and knew that each night the children were on their own and checked at regular intervals. I do however believe that the Abductor was determined to abduct a child and if it had not been Madeleine it would have been some other unfortunate child.

[archiesmummy]

Agree, but it's a scary thought that we can't 100% protect are LOs.
Prob easier to think they did something wrong rather than face up to the fact it could happen to any family

"the person responsible is the one who abducted her, and if, sadly, it is anything to do with paedophilia, then all those people who support the industry in child porn by watching and paying for the stuff also bear some responsibility"

But they don't just bear SOME responsibility because every picture they look at or every video they view a child is being abused, that makes them abusers themselves IMO.