Anyone watching Channel 5's Under Suspicion Kate McCann?

[ilovebrie8]

It was on last night

Why had they obviously been drugged? My DC (who was usually a terrible sleeper btw) could sleep through anything after a day at the beach.

It wouldn't need to be heavy drugs. An adult dose of antihistamines would do the job.

They quite possibly aren’t. It’s just that their mistakes didn’t have such a horrific outcome.

And banging on endlessly about what dreadful parents would leave their children unsupervised on holiday does nothing to bring ‘justice for the life of a small child’? Are you suggesting them being charged with something and possibly getting a custodial sentence would have brought their daughter ‘justice’? Or berating them on the internet?

The McCanns allowed samples of hair to be taken from themselves and the twins to disprove this. No evidence of drugging whatsoever.

Quite. But let's not allow facts to get in the way!

I would like to see the person/people responsible for MM's death convicted, irrespective of who they are.

So do you think no parent should ever be charged with neglect which results in harm to their child?

So would everyone, I imagine. It’s just extremely unlikely now.

What a weird non-sequitur.

it actually follows quite logically from your comment. After all, any child who comes to harm as a direct result of their parents’ neglect, can’t have the harm undone. They can’t be ‘unhurt’. But justice is about far more than that

The Portuguese criminal justice system decided that the McCanns’ actions did not meet the threshold for neglect.

If you’re not talking about the criminal justice system, what is it that you mean by ‘justice’?

Neglect should be prosecuted.
On the other hand if otherwise good, caring parents make one mistake it shouldn't be.
Eg. If someone left their kid in the car while popping to pay for petrol and the car was stolen - not prosecuted
Sat in garden with friends. Child abducted from bed. Not prosecuted

But the relevant police force did not think the McCanns met the threshold for neglect.

I know. I agree with them

It’s a mystery and just doesn’t add up at all.

I’ve read loads about it over the years and was in Portugal on holiday not long after. When it was in the news as so high profile and it was the main talking point.

Hopefully at some point a break though can be made and justice done; as no one can just disappear without a trace.

"The McCanns allowed samples of hair to be taken from themselves and the twins to disprove this. No evidence of drugging whatsoever."

But they did this so late that there would be no evidence left as they would have known so this proves nothing

That’s not correct. The indication of drugs in someone’s system will be evident at the root of the hair, and will remain until the hair has grown to the point where that bit of the hair has been cut off. Someone with longish hair will keep evidence of drug use for years. It’s not like a urine test.

Yes, the idea that continuing to repeat two decades of criticism about neglect achieves anything at all is stupid. I actually agree they behaved awfully, fwiw, but it's incredibly arrogant and unrealistic to imagine that things people say on the Internet with no ability to influence proceedings is leading to justice. There will be no prosecution for neglect now. It's done.

If you want to keep saying it because you like doing it, crack on, but don't pretend it's anything more than that.

But did they supply the root of the hair or did they cut the hair
For the Children's Drug Tests: Cut hair samples were supplied. In September 2007,(5 months after ) the McCanns voluntarily provided cut hair samples from themselves and their two-year-old twins, Sean and Amelie. Laboratories
A hair sample can typically detect drug use for up to 90 days (3 months) (from a standard (1.5) inch scalp sample).

If you don't know, that means you can't claim they did it so late there'd be no evidence left.

But we do know
For the Children's Drug Tests: Cut hair samples were supplied. In September 2007,(5 months after ) Cut hair not root supplied after 3 months so to late

I don't know much about drug testing, never having needed it to be done. But from a quick Google and memories of watching Jeremy Kyle and the like I've come to the conclusion that for the first 3 months after suspected drug use, it would show up in the 1.5 inches closest to the scalp. After that it would be the longer bits of hair.

I can't imagine that in a criminal investigation the experts didn't know this and tested the roots. Or that the provision of hair wasn't supervised to prevent fraud.

I could be completely wrong, but that's my understanding

Completely agree. I cannot look at pics/videos of Kate, her pain is palpable.

“If you want to keep saying it because you like doing it, crack on, but don't pretend it's anything more than that.”

I’m not, thanks for the permission to form and post my own opinions though, on an internet forum.

To be fair, there’s a big difference between starting a thread just to berate the McCanns for neglecting their children, which I agree is just pointless and unkind, and responding to posts where we might disagree, or query what someone means, or feel an important point is being minimised.

So far on this thread, there have been a few posters who seem to minimise or normalise what the McCanns did (‘everyone did it back then’ ‘it was no different to the babysitting system at the resort’ etc) I completely disagree that it was very normal in 2007 to leave toddlers unattended while going out. And obviously leaving the children and popping back every half hour or so was totally different to leaving them in the evening nursery provision.

There have also been several comments about the twin siblings being ‘fine’ - someone actually said something along the lines of them having grown up to be better than the adult offspring of most MN posters or words to that effect! 🤨 Again, I disagree that someone who knows they were left unattended at age 2, whose older sister has gone missing, and who has grown up in a household where the grief goes on and there are no conclusive answers can be ‘fine.’ Hopefully there will have been specialist support to enable them to come to terms with it but I think it’s minimising the experience to just say they’re fine.

This is a public forum for discussion. When someone starts a thread, people will inevitably comment. If someone comments with something you disagree with, responding with a personal attack and saying they’re just being nasty doesn’t mean a jot. Disagree with a reasonable opinion or facts. If you can.