The McCanns are to sue a Portuguese paper which claimed they killed Maddy. Do you think this proves innocence?

Question

If they had anything to do with this they would try to keep things quiet. Anyway, dont you think this should clear any doubts

Answer 1

Just another example of evasive tactics. I said right at the start that there's more to this than meets the eye, and this is just a little bit more of that 'more' I spoke about ! ! !

Answer 2

I dont think it proves innocence, as by making a noise about it they have almost created a taboo about blaming them. I do think they are innocent though (apart from the neglect leaving their kids alone for periods of time longer than half an hour in a foreign hotel), but the paper never made any actual claims and they have just been pretty attention seeking money grabbing people. Papers make all sorts of claims and discuss different theories, and we know the Mcanns are just after money because they said "we will never go back to Rothley because the bad memories are there". Surely the bad memories are in portugal and they would want to go home? No they want to move to a big mansion in france or something.

Answer 3

When a crime has been committed, there are many things that the guilty party/parties can do to alert the police to their identity. From the little that I know about this case, I definitely have the impression that the McCanns have done most of those things. I desperately hope that she's found alive and well and I hope that they do catch those responsible. However, there are many anomalies to this case. The McCann's actions, which will have impeded any police investigation, "They've taken her!" and the cadaver dog. This is a strange case.

Answer 4

Claiming that they are going to sue is different than actually doing it. It remains to be seen whether they actually DO sue the paper. This doesn't clear doubts at all. There is NO PROOF that Maddie was abducted just the words of the McCanns. Where is the EVIDENCE of abduction. There ISN'T ANY.

Answer 5

Why is it that people instantly pull up this "Fund" that is being collected and assume that the McCanns have access to it for themselves? If these Muppet's would think before allowing the Money aspect of it to creep in, it is a fund set up for a purpose, not to get rich out of.

Where do these Numpties get off?

It does surprise me how little people actually think about this before answering and it does actually show how thoughtless and immature people are as well as lacking in the facts.

If they sue the paper, good on them, it will send a clear message to the press that they cannot simply print what they like just to increase circulation which is what
I see the slander / Libel as and nothing more.

The media need to be kept in check and a previous sited case where Azaria Chamberlain went missing and the parents were wrongly accused by the press that only incited and installed a pre-conviction because it slanted the case against the parents and low and behold, years later it turns out to be true.

If everyone looked at the "Circus" for what it is, then numpties wouldn't be posting slanderous and Libellous remarks.

It stands to reason and you have to remember that all guilty parties get found out in the end regardless as well as the old "Innocent until proven guilty"

If you can not do anything other than post a gutter snipe remark then you have no business on Y!A.

Answer 6

I don't believe it proves innocents, i think in a world where people are suing at the drop of a hat, not to sue would be seen as very strange, this is a no win situation and any avenue the McCanns take will always be open to speculation and suspicion, this i believe they have bought on themselves, they have not handled the whole situation very well x

Answer 7

I don't think so, not that I believe they're guilty, but there is such a thing as protesting too much, it's not just an old saying.
I honestly don't know what to believe anymore. The only thing I do know for certain has been dissected to the nth degree, that is that they should not have left those kiddies alone as they were at an age where they were completely incapable of looking after themselves. I know everyone keeps saying that, but at this point in time, that is the only one true fact that we do have, isn't it?

Answer 8

deflection has always been the best form of defence, when everything else has failed.
ever heard the expression
the lady doth protest too much?
they're not going to sue over the accusations of neglect or child endangerment by leaving the children in an unlocked room, but suggestions that they drugged their children.
i think it's called hitting a nerve.

as it turns out the mccanns did the same thing on holiday in Greece, leaving their children unattended to wine & dine.

i do not hate the mccanns but i damn well hate what they did & the excuses that they've made over leaving their children,
a remark about not wanting to use the hotels baby-sitting service, as they didn't want to leave them with strangers.
when the same day madeleine disappeared she'd spent the day at an pre-school age activity club & the twins have until recently spent most days at a crèche, hence leaving them with STRANGERS!

Answer 9

Not at all. Legal action for slander, defamation and so on is the favourite weapon of those with something to hide, to shut up people who are getting close to the truth. Witness Robert Maxwell. Witness Jeffrey Archer. Witness Rupert Murdoch.

Fortunately the police will reach the truth sooner or later and this whole money-making scam will be halted - not before time.

Answer 10

I don't think it proves innocence or guilt. Jeffrey Archer and Jonathan Aitken both sued but the outcome did not go their way at all.

Answer 11

Why does it have to prove innocence? They are innocent, the police have stated over and over again that they are NOT suspects. Show me an ounce of proof or evidence otherwise?