To think the Met spending £5 million on Maddie McCann is unfair on others who have missing children

[Ilovemyself]

I know how retched I would feel if I were in the McCanns position, and would want no expense to be spared in the hunt for answers.

But I can't help but think that this case has been so high profile that other cases must have funding cut or not even be followed up as the budget is limited.

I honestly don't know what the answer is, but it does seem this case has benefitted in ways others wouldn't.

I feel bad for thinking its unfair on others, but just can't help wondering how other victims of serious crime feel.

This is being pushed by Cameron and directly funded by the Home Office. It is clear he and the Met are looking for some good publicity out of this.

I am dubious about this: as RedHelen and others have said, there isn't a jot of evidence that Madeline McCann was snatched by a child abductor from her room, within a twenty minute time frame.

Her parents don't know she was abducted any more than we can. I don't necessarily think that this is a sign of them covering up a murder, but I can see why they would desperately cling to this idea as a way of lessening their own sense of guilt for their own negligence on the night when she disappeared.

This new investigation appears to be wholly based on the McCann's terms and frame of reference, which isn't helpful and should perhaps explore wider possibilities.

Hahahahaha. Fgs. Assume you've checked that with the Met have you? Why not just leave them to investigate, and trust them to be sceptical about the witness statements? Instead of making a sweeping statement ?
I can't stand this whole attitude that the McCanns are guilty of something, anything, and as if none of these thoughts have ever been considered.

It's weird isn't it, the way any criticism of either the mccanns or criticism of the decision to plough millions more into this case than countless others is just some kind of sacrilege to some people! Truly bizarre.

"Just leave the Met to investigate"... I'm sorry but if we're going down the hahahahahaha route, that comment has to take top prize.

Yes, right, that would be because the Met are absolutely beyond reproach, have an impeccable track record, and have nothing to prove in terms of integrity, yeah?

Hahahahaha. Fgs. Assume you've checked that with the Met have you? Why not just leave them to investigate, and trust them to be sceptical about the witness statements? Instead of making a sweeping statement ?
I can't stand this whole attitude that the McCanns are guilty of something, anything, and as if none of these thoughts have ever been considered.

No I didn't check with the Met but I did hear their press release and it was centred around looking up convicted sex offenders and identifying suspects. (But as an aside given the corruption, abuse of power and incompetence that seems rife in the Met, I wouldn't trust them to wipe their own arses)

I didn't say the McCanns are guilty of anything, other than being blinkered over the possibilities of what happened to their daughter. The only thing they countenance happening to her was an abduction. I can see why that is the most psychologically comforting thing for them to cling to.

When there isn't any evidence an abduction took place. Any number of things could have happened As Janey said upthread, people can't get their heads around the fact that there are myriad possibilities between the 2 extremes of 'parents harmed her' and 'events happened exactly as the parents state they did'

You seem to belong squarely to that category.

janey68 - indeed.

Nerf - why does raising the possibility of something other than abduction from the room automatically mean people think the McCanns are guilty of "something, anything?" Maddie could have woken up and wandered off, and then been abducted. Or fallen into a drain. Or hit by a car. Or something. These are possibilities that do not necessarily imply guilt of the McCanns.

Although, some people, will always believe the McCanns guilty of one thing - child neglect - even if they don't believe they had any other involvement.

Compos. No love I am quite capable of appreciating that the McCanns neither harmed their daughter nor got exactly what happened exactly right. I just wonder why you and others seem to think they should demonstrate an ability to think of other possibilities.
I can't be bothered to keep stating the obvious. None of us are privy to anything that could actually shed light on it all. Let the money and time be spent regardless of what you may think to be negligent behaviour.
That's my position and I'm not going to state it anymore. It's an unpleasant thread.

Nerf - just out of interest, do YOU not think it was neglectful to leave those children there unattended?

"No, love".... Fabulous, always the sign of intelligent debate hey?

Well, fwiw many of us do have an I interest in how public funds are spent and feel uneasy at the way this one case is prioritised over so many other deserving cases.

And I'm certainly not asking the McCanns to 'demonstrate' other possibilities. They just should stop banging on about 'knowing' MM was taken 'from her bed' when they can't substantiate that

Obviously it is critical to the McCanns that Madeline was snatched from the apartment, because any other possible scenario leaves them implicated in some way.
I don't believe they had any hand in Madeline's disappearance and cannot begin to imagine the grief and trauma that Kate McCann, in particular, must have gone through.
That said, I did get the impression from the beginning that proving the parents innocence was almost equally important to her father as the search for Madeline. They were very careful not to blame themselves for leaving the dc alone, except in carefully phrased sentences presumably agreed by lawyers. They spent a good deal of the search fund on lawyers, PR and media management. I just can't help but feel that a lot of the suspicion surrounding them could have been avoided if they had just said, from the beginning, "we did an incredibly stupid thing," rather than the perpetual excuses and justifications and insistence upon the break-in by an intruder.

Yes, agree 100% currentbuns

I don't think the parents had a hand in her disappearance either. But I agree that they have not helped the cause whatsoever by their absolute refusal to be open minded to any other possibility than someone entering their apartment within a very narrow time frame and taking MM from her bed. They decided from the off that this must have been what happened and have stuck steadfastly to it because its what they want to believe (when I say 'want' obviously that's out of all the awful possibilities)
And you're right, there has been an equally steadfast refusal to believe that they have done anything negligent. At the most they have said 'with hindsight we wouldn't have done it' but they have never said, 'yes, actually we were neglectful and irresponsible'. And to reiterate again: I find it hard to believe that on a relaxing holiday evening, after several bottle of wine had been consumed, ALL the adults were all TOTALLY accurate in their recall of timings and other details. As I said, if they were accurate, it would fly in the face of all known evidence which shows there is normally a wide variation in recall.

janey - you only need to read a lot of the interviews and articles with the Tapas 9/McCanns (ie, their own words) to see a lot of contradictions and changes of mind as time went on

What curentbuns said.

That's my position and I'm not going to state it anymore. It's an unpleasant thread

Well nerf it isn't compulsory to post on this thread, so if you feel you don't have anything useful to add, well don't let the door hit you on the arse as you leave, there's a love.

If you don't want to add anything else that's your prerogative, how large sums of public public money and Police manpower is used is something that should be debated.

The unpleasant thing about this thread is that people seem happy for millions to be spent on some cases whilst others are ignored.

I can't understand how people can't get over the need to support the McCanns ( even when that isn't the question) so much they can't see how others are left with no work being done on their case.

Because "support" apparently means never ever saying anything other than trite platitudes, over-familiar rending, and full willingness to use the entire gdp on one single case.
Anything else is "unpleasant".

Kobayashi your bringing of logic into this is uncalled for.

I am the only one surprised this thread us still here?

"The unpleasant thing about this thread is that people seem happy for millions to be spent on some cases whilst others are ignored.

I can't understand how people can't get over the need to support the McCanns ( even when that isn't the question) so much they can't see how others are left with no work being done on their case."

1.NO-ONE has indicated that they are happy for other cases to be ignored.

1. there is only your presumption that if some cases are not followed up it is as a direct result of the police choosing either / or and deciding to bother with one child and not another. This is highly unlikely.
2. If there are cases which COULD be usefully and productively followed up in addition to the disappearance of MMcC then they should be . that is what most people think.

The police have looked at this case from a different angle from the way it was approached in the first place. They have identified 38 'persons of interset' who wer in the area at the time and who have never before been interviewed or considered. Why do you think they should decide not to bother to undertake this excercise, which is something the Met would have done had they been involve initially?

OP - IMO you are accusing people of having a view that doesn' exist to prove your own sense of righteous indiagnation.

And unless you are within the police management system I don't see how you can make the assumptions you so assertively insist are correct.

The unpleasant thing about this thread is the fact that you bothered to start it at all, IMO.

If they didn't spend millions on this case, it doesn't automatically follow that those funds would be available for other cases.

Exit. Why would the thread be removed? I honestly don't know.

Blu. You miss the point I am making completely. It is not what is being spent on the McCanns that is the problem ( although I do admit there is not a bottomless pit of money)

If people actually said that they agreed that the other cases should be looked at then there wouldn't be an argument about the "distasteful" nature of the thread or anything like that.

Persons of interest can simply mean potential witnesses, so we don't know where this will lead. And are these new people or people that were questioned in the original investigation.

And I am sorry, but I do believe that there is political pressure being applied here, and that both the current PM and Met commander have much to gain even if the likelihood of ever gaining a result is very slim (which it may or may not be). Lets face it, the Met at the moment looks very poor and needs to draw attention away from the negative.

Just look at the post of Jessicabratricefletcher from last night. If a retired met officer says that the spend on this is higher than any other in history you have to ask yourself why, especially as the chance of finder her decreases with time.

I like anyone else would love to see her returned. But I want to see other cases chased as vigourously. Any parent whose child is missing deserves that.

There have been other books written about the Madeleine McCann disappearance, but the McCanns have spent millions of pounds getting them banned in this country.
The detective in charge, Inspector Amarol, wrote one and Steve Marsden.
They make interesting reading and are available from the USA.

I think money spent on a reconstruction would be good, but the McCanns have always refused to do this.

Why is this thread unpleasant?
Op makes valid points and that's her opinion, it's a discussion, nothing more, nothing less.
I really don't understand what is wrong with discussing this.

TimeofChange. The McCaans have done a reconstruction! It was screened in May 2009 on Channel 4.

This thread is full of untruths mascerdaing as 'facts'

What time & what channel - with all that money they raised I would have expected more people to have watched it & known about it and for it to be on their website perhaps?