Should we charge Gerry & Kate McCann ?

Discussion in 'The Intelligence Cell' started by 58_Pattern, Oct 29, 2007.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Under EU Law should Gerry & Kate not be charged with leaving a wee one with no care. Understand bit of a hot potato but I think that they should be made to answer for there lack of parenting. Plenty of chav scum in the UK have been infront of a Resident Magistate for being bad parents. Should we not now see justice in the UK or Portugal and put them in the dock. EU Law and all that. I think it may be a case to be answered and not paid from donations.
  2. Irrespective of a more serious crime having been committed, haven't they suffered enough?
  3. If you want to prosecute the McCanns for making the mistake of believing the world to be a better place than it is you'll also have to charge all the other (really) bad parents who, instead of tucking their tired kids up in bed at a reasonable hour, drag them around bars all evening while they get slowly pissed in front of them.
    The McCann's are not bad parents. They are victims.
  4. Nope disagree. They need to be made an example of. It will discourage other parents from going out for tapas and leaving the wee ones home alone. Jail the McCanns and make an example of them regardless of what happened after they left the poor wee child in their accomodation while they enjoyed decent food nearby.
  5. Yes Victims of fond of fine food that was more important than the wee ones safety. Any parent on the lash with kids should be made to answer. When my wee ones were young it was back to the villa. Door locked, Mom & Dad on balcony, kids in bed. They were my prime concern.
  6. She wasn't a poor wee child until some b astard decided to abduct her.
    She was a tired wee child safely asleep in bed.
    If you come and steal my dog from my car on my drive it's your fault. YOU are to blame- not me for leaving it there unattended.
  7. She was not safe in her bed. Gerry & Kate were enjoying food and a bit of craic away from her bedroom. Majorissues you just don't get the point do you ?
  8. No.

    If it was an abduction then their negligence in leaving the children made it possible. Not only that, it was an act of negligence that any half-way responsible parent would recognise as such. Saying "well, lots of others do it" does not make it less irresponsible.

    If that was a defence then if I decide to drink 5 pints, get in my car, and run your kid over I should be let off. It would be incredibly irresponsible but lots of people do it, and I'll punish myself for the rest of my life anyway, so why should I "suffer more" for what I've done?

    One problem with charging them now though - as long as they're officially suspects in the disappearance themselves it could be a bit awkward to have them found guilty of negligently leaving the child if there are grounds later to bring more serious charges.
  9. If there are any parents who don't see what happened to that poor little kid as an example , whether or not her parents are charged, they must be brain dead. And FFS isn't it time this subject was put on the back burner until a definite answer to what happened is found.
  10. they should be charged.
    they were criminally negligent and should be prosecuted as such.
    as has been said, just because the crime is a common one does not make it any less criminal.
    and as for the "suffering enough", tough shit. if prosecuting them discourages other parents from making the same stupid mistake, then hopefully their suffering will not have been in vain. but personally i dont see why their suffering should even be considered. maddie is the primary victim and her suffering should be the biggest concern.
    if a person is charged with manslaughter, should the authorities be lenient with them if they feel bad for thier crime?
  11. They left their kids and went for a meal, that is negligence!!!! How dare some cunt compare a child to a dog in this thread let alone back up leaving said child over 50 yards away from where you were enjoying a tapas bar.

  12. So, hypothetically, would it be the same if I left the keys in the ignition whilst paying for fuel at the garage, and some scrote screeched away with the motor?
    The insurance wouldn't pay up. Guess who is paying.

    Providing it doesn't affect any future, more serious charges, I vote "Double 'em away!"
  13. What if its a hot day and the dog dies from the heat? Is that not negligent? Anyway the pedophile (assuming it wasn't the parents) who stole the child, yes he (or she) is to blame but the parents still left their "property" unsecured, and any insurance company wouldn't pay out if it were tools left unsecured in a van.
  14. Without getting diverted on the whole dog in car thing.

    It's very easy to jump on bandwaggons. Speaking personally, I don't know enough of the detail of the case to argue whether the McCanns were irresponsible or not. Just because they were not in their appartment, does not, to my mind, automatically mean that they have deserted their kids.
    - Did the restaurant overlook the apartment? I don't know.
    - Did they regularly check up on the kids? I don't know.
    - Had they not gone out that night, would it have made a difference? I don't know.

    To say that because she was abducted and that they were not within x yards of her at the time automatically makes them guilty of a crime to me sets a very very dangerous precedent.

    My earlier comment was trying to say that even if you took them to court and found them guilty, what punishment could be worse than losing a child?

    ** all of the above is based upon the assumption that the McCann parents were in no way directly responsible for Maddie's disapearance.