The McCanns, mainly Kate McCann, because she was blonde, attractive, affluent but had a “cold” face, were victims of their social class in the way they were perceived. It was a classic case of building somebody up to knock them down, to make them fodder. There was an early culture war element to it, they were seem as “elite” and the public school educated vultures who ran the tabloids whipped up working class, “outsider” anger against them. That anger translated into all sorts of outlandish insanity in an era when the tabloids – who were desperately looking for a successor to a decade of front page conspiracy over Diana’s death - still set the agenda. The phenomenon of internet conspiracy theories was beginning to hit critical mass. 9/11 truthers were in their pomp. Trust in “official narratives” was starting to break down due to the Iraq War. The McCanns were perceived to be New Labour types. Therefore, in the minds of the batshit, their desperate search for their child somehow became the falsification of weapons of mass destruction. There was no difference. “They’re lying to us”, “what are they not telling us?”, all this stuff became mainstream. In hindsight, and as we see demonstrated here, the McCann case was one more early harbinger of the mass brain rot internet based society would unleash on populations.
I do not know anything of the sort, except you are a weirdo who is following me around.
You kept replying to me.
Your dogs have been exposed and you can’t come with any prove she wasn’t at the kids club.
You can insult me all you like.
You are spoofing.
I really think there’s an awful lot of stretches and loads of presumptions that don’t make sense in what you’re saying. I’m not prejudging the outcome of the case but here’s some of them:
You don’t know what the main plank of their argument is, it hasn’t come to court.
Supposition. You’ve not seen the book of evidence. Is “hard evidence” even necessary?
Oh come on.
No, that’s completely wrong if there’s going to be a jury trial.
In all criminal cases? Really? Most criminal justice systems in the western world are operating wrongly the vast majority of the time then.
Can I ask directly, are you implying it’s a conspiracy to pin this crime on this guy? That seemed to be what you were suggesting earlier. If so, that’s absolutely bananas. For a start, if police in Germany decided to falsely accuse this fella with a crime - which I highly highly doubt - this is the last crime they’d pick.
You are getting rattled again.
I’m not getting rattled.
I’m genuinely curious as it’s an interesting case.
You put up a fair theory but it’s been exposed.
You seem to have no counter only personal insults.
Intersting article. I think 2 and 6 are interesting and plays into my theory that the parents just dont sit right with me. They wouldnt be the first people to lie on the late late after committing a horrific crime
Of which you are clearly a member.
Your behaviour towards me is weird, putting it mildly.
If you cannot see that truth…
They didn’t know each other that well. How well would nine people have to know each other to cover up that? It is just not at all credible in any way, shape or form.
He’s the fucking mayor
We all are, buddy. The point is that many people out there simply are not cut out to deal with living in such.
Do you think it acceptable to publicly accuse a person of a heinous crime, publicly search their property, and publicly state that they were guilty, you just didn’t quite have enough evidence to charge them?
Doubtless, by the same token, you were happy with the whole Maurice McCabe saga, which followed roughly similar lines until, oh wait.
It’s klu Klux Klan policing.
So you have no evidence to back up your theory she died a few days earlier.
It was exactly the main plank of their argument when they initially publicly accused him.
Well I’d like to think there would be some hard evidence, yes. You’re like an overweight sherriff in Mississippi circa 1920.
They leaked everything else.
Sigh. I’ll explain it to you again slowly. He wasn’t charged at the time. They said themselves they didn’t “quite” have enough evidence. You know, actual evidence like.
Surely a can of Coke rather than a bottle in this scenario. Neil cutting himself with a can of Coke in the inbetweeners springs to mind.
I was going to edit my post to say can rather than bottle but decided not to.
I surmised our resident truther might seize on the similarity of the word “can” to “McCann” and use it as “evidence”.