26 January 2009

Quote of the Day - Looking back on the Madeleine case

"In a way, we would like to have been accused so we could defend ourselves openly. Now, reading the process, there is no evidence that justifies the suspicion, apart from the dogs' action. There was never a sustained explanation. And the questioning: 'What happened to Madeleine? How did you get rid of her? Who helped you? Where did you put her?' All fantasy! If they had found DNA – so what? And if Madeleine had hurt herself inside the apartment – why would that be our fault?"

Gerry McCann, to Expresso, on 06.09.2008


14 comments:

  1. In other words " Even if we did it what are you going to to about it, don't bother me with trivialities "

    ReplyDelete
  2. Is not to comment this post.

    It is about the always very sad case: RUI PEDRO.

    http://dn.sapo.pt/2009/01/26/sociedade/processo_pedro_arquivado_breve.html

    ReplyDelete
  3. Disgusted-but-still-hoping-4-justice-4-MadeleineMonday, January 26, 2009 9:21:00 am

    Every time I read/hear their words from right after Madeleine disappeared and knowing what we now know from reading parts of the PJ report, all I can say is they make me want to vomit.

    ReplyDelete
  4. never seen this quote before - thanks for posting

    the primary function of a parent is to take responsibility for your child's welfare...

    the only way in which they are responsible parents is in that they are responsible for Madeleine's death.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Joana, is the date,below this text above, correct? 2007?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Thanks, Anonymous @ 09.47.

    The date was obviously wrong, and has been duly corrected.

    My mistake.

    ReplyDelete
  7. They still have the chance to be accused.As a matter of fact, they had many days to ask for a process, last year. Why did they not take the chance? Panorama BBC (October/November 2007)says at the end, that they could better be processed in order to clean their names, if they are innocent, instead of living the rest of their lives being seen as suspects, by the great majority of the people.Shelving the investigations only means they still can not proof that the child died in the apartment.By the way, on the map of Praia da Luz and Luz(Amaral's book) I thought a cross near the see meant a cemetery. Now I think it is that church.In this case a think now that that man brought her body to a car near the church and the person who helped him took it away.That's why all went so fast.The "abductor" only knew how to find the church.The person who helped him knew the place well.And must speak perfect English.And I believe that the contact happened between this helper and England, and England called the "äbductor", giving instructions to him. "THE CHURCH, at 9.55. He is already there, waiting for you!!!!!"
    The PJ must know this and are not talking about.Who was this helper, obeying orders?This is my theory!!!!!!!No little boat from the beach.

    ReplyDelete
  8. "...we would like to have been accused so we could defend ourselves openly."
    Really? Because I have the impression that that was the last thing you wanted.So why did you ask for Gonçalo Amaral to be removed from the case?Why did you ask to the english government to stop the investigation?


    "...there is no evidence that justifies the suspicion, apart from the dogs' action."
    You really hate those dogs don't you?
    Are you sure there's nothing else besides the dogs?Maybe you haven't read all the process.
    Or maybe someone should remind you that you are not the only ones who have read the process.

    "All fantasy"
    I don't know why but this reminds of all those sightings...

    "And if Madeleine had hurt herself inside the apartment – why would that be our fault?"
    That is a very good question!
    Let me see,hypothetically if she:
    -Was alone when she hurt herself
    -Remained alone after hurting herself
    -Died because she hurt herself,while she was alone in the appartment

    Then whose fault is it? Hers?

    WHAT KIND OF A MAN ARE YOU?
    WHAT KIND OF A FATHER ARE YOU?

    ReplyDelete
  9. Going back to my comment above, I think the corpse went to a house with a garage with a door communicating directly to the house, from inside, or a house in the middel of a large garden, very far from the road.The helper would not come out of the garage with a dead child in his arms, taking the risk of being seen from the street, making noise closing its door.If there was any noise, the child must have been still inside the car.After having closed the big door, at the side of the street, the helper went inside the house using the side door.

    ReplyDelete
  10. smug rotten bastards , nothing more nothing less. This quote was a "up yours,prove it" to the p.j.
    Unbelievable that he shouls think if Madeleine had an accident it was not their fault. They man thinks he is God.

    ReplyDelete
  11. The McCann's were released from aguido status. There is no evidence against them. There is no case against them. There is no evidence that Madeliene is not alive. There is no evidence that she was not abducted.I have faith that Madeline can still be recovered and God willing that is what is going to happen. Her parents are inocent and you will have to swallow your dirty little blog and your lies and apologise but it will be TOO LATE.You will be sued and youwill go to jail. Evil people!

    ReplyDelete
  12. Look, our dear "evil" anonymous has just posted a comment at 14.21!I wonder if he is Gerry or Clarence? Philomena perhaps? One of them for sure!

    How are you all doing? Lots of sightings and newspapers(???) articles to be arranged right? You must be so busy!
    But you always find the time to visit us here.How thoughtful of you!
    I'm sorry but I'll have to say it again :
    -Blood in the appartment;
    -15 Dna markers out of 19 indicate it was Madeleine's;
    -Death scent found in that same appartment, inside the parents car (hired several weeks after she "vanished") on Kate's clothes, on cuddle cat;
    -Only Jane Tanner saw "the abductor".She's not an independent witness nor a credible one;
    -No one wanted to do the reconstruction;
    -No jemmied window;
    -No break in;
    -Several inconsistencies in the testimonies given by the parents and their friends;
    -Metodo 3, hired by the Mccanns, payed for several sightings;
    And so on.

    Yes,the McCann's were released from arguido status but THERE IS evidence against them,THERE IS a case against them,THERE IS evidence that Madeleine is not alive.
    And you, by being here all the time, threatening us when some things are said and shown, are just proving that they are guilty and still fear that justice can be done.

    Sue us???
    Put us in jail???
    For what? Telling the truth?
    Don't be ridiculous! Go back to your miserable life and stop making a fool of yourself.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Anonymous 14.21 has posted:"I have faith that Madeline can still be recovered..."
    Are you talking about a person or about a car, a tv?
    This people only care about the parents.Madeleine is just a small detail.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Yet another sad example of how good parents the McCanns are and how they are concerned about the well-being and safety of their children. Not feeling responsible for any injury Madelaine might have had! Even when one could do nothing to prevent our little ones from harm, one always feels bad for them, at least I do.
    Another one was what he thought(I believe he wrote them in his blog) when he talked to another british couple, in the Tapas restaurant, who were having a somewhat disturbed meal because they had their small children with them :- How LUCKY he was to have their own children ALONE in the flat and be able to ENJOY HIS MEAL IN PEACE AND QUIET.

    ReplyDelete