Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Thats very noble of you MP. I think people, especially parents, feel the need to discuss cases like this in the same way you discuss other nightmarish issues. At the moment I wake up and first thing I watch the TV for any news on the little girl and last thing at night. It may not be any of my business, but am feeling it personally.

I have just read that there has been a 2.5 million pound reward offered for the safe return of Madeleine. As we are all aware, today is her fourth birthday. I cannot even begin to imagine what the family must be feeling today, but I am heartened to see that Madeleine remains in the news and in everyones thoughts until she is found.


DM

This situation with Mr Durat is making me feel a little uncomfortable. If he didnt do it then his life is well and truly up the proverbial Swanny, sh*t sticks no matter what. Then again, thinking of the Huntley case, the fact that he has made himself so busy around the scene leaves me with the chills!. Trying hard not to be too judgemental but I dont think its particularly constructive to be naming this guy yet. What do the rest of you think?

I agree.


It did feel to me like journalists creating a story in the absence of anything from the Police. So, single bloke, living with mother, showing "too much" interest in the press and being "too close" to the investigations - lets shop him to the Police, make our own story and then bang on self-righteously about what a value to Society the journos are.


I think not..

Right now, I feel sorry for the man in question. His life is ruined because the police are doing their job. If he turns out to be guilty, fair enough, but for people to tick off the checklist - 'lives with mother, custody battle over daughter who is also 4, made show of helping police, lives nearby' - and think the worst is abominable behaviour. The right thing to do is to regard him as innocent while at the same time acknowledge our suspicions and put them on one side. His mother and uncle must be perplexed too. And before anyone starts, my sympathy for him does not negate that for the McCanns. Nero
it does have echos of the huntley affair,almost too close to the mark infact,but its an established fact that murderers do tend to return to the scene of the crime whilst the investigation is still live,whether its an attempt to gloat or to throw investigators off the scent has yet to be decided, but police will always pay particular attention to crowds around a murder scene in an attempt to pick up some clues esp from a persons non-verbal behaviour.thats one reason when in a lot of murder cases family members are always encouraged to give press conferences not just to raise profile of the case but precisely because the plod will be scrutinising their behaviour for any tell-tale signs of guilt,because as it stands stranger murder is still very rare,most victims are known by their killer.
Spadetownboy, your point about police and press conferences reminded me. I lived in Oxford when a student Rachel McClean went missing, the police wheeled out a very sweaty boyfriend/murderer - John Tanner- who broke down in tears at the press conference said he loved her, pleading for her to get in contact, he also did a reconstruction waving her off at Oxford train station. Later it turned out that right from the get-go the police knew she'd never got on a train and thought he'd killed her.

I don't want to put any more of a downer on this as the whole case has really upset me being the mother of a young daughter and all that, but I have read that in cases like this a specific ploy of the police to keep the public aware is for the family to make statements saying they believe the child is alive. If the public think the child is dead then it becomes a search for a body and people lose interest. However usually if they are not found within 24 hours the child is dead. Frankly the alternatives to her being dead are too awful to contemplate. I just hope this reaches some conclusion for the sake of the parents unlke the parents of the boy in Greece already mentioned above.

In re. the British man - I think the similarities with Huntley are spooky, I remember seeing Huntley being interviewed just after the girls went missing and feeling suspicious of him. I would say that the journalist who reported the British guy did not do it lightly and really felt something was wrong.

Is anyone else finding the media circuses around Madeleine and that BBC reporter a bit odd? I think both cases are truly horrifying and my sympathies go out to the families. And yet the blanket media coverage is a bit mystifying when there is no real news in either case. Meanwhile how many are dying in Zimbabwe and Iraq every day?
I know how absolutely ridiculous and beside the point this is, but I only saw the other night that she has a coloboma (key hole pupils cos part of the iris is missing). I have that, and we're very rare... Just made me feel sad... Like I say, completely nonsensical, but there you go. On the bright side, it makes her that bit more recognisable!
It does indeed, acuity and visual field... I do have to agree with Georgia and James, in that as bad as this is, there are plenty of things out there that are just as bad! How would you feel now if your child was missing, and this one particular case was getting all the attention? That said, it doesn't make it wrong of people to care.

For sure, but if I were in their position I would be doing the same. And they are taking the best advice that it must be kept as fresh as possible otherwise people do become bored, which I think is in evidence already.


Excuse my ignorance Keef, what is acuity?

I'm can't see how maintaining a high profile in the press can possibly help matters concerning the investigation, which surely is the only real thing of import here. Finding the girl and putting away whoever abducted her.

Whether read about it on the front pages, or whether we find out about every nuance of the accuseds' lives in a trial by press is neither here nor there and, frankly, a little disturbing.


I appreciate many of you with kids can empathise and are genuine in your thoughts and prayers, but it's none of our business ultimately. We don't know these people and we never will.


Sorry, I'll back off again.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • why do we think we have the right for the elected local council to be transparent?
    • Granted Shoreditch is still London, but given that the council & organisers main argument for the festival is that it is a local event, for local people (to use your metaphor), there's surprisingly little to back this up. As Blah Blah informatively points out, this is now just a commercial venture with no local connection. Our park is regarded by them as an asset that they've paid to use & abuse. There's never been any details provided of where the attendees are from, but it's still trotted out as a benefit to the local community.  There's never been any details provided of any increase in sales for local businesses, but it's still trotted out as a benefit to the local community.  There's promises of "opportunities" for local people & traders to work at the festival, but, again, no figures to back this up. And lastly, the fee for the whole thing goes 100% to running the Events dept, and the dozens of free events that no-one seems able to identify, and, yes, you guessed it - no details provided for by the council. So again, no tangible benefit for the residents of the area.
    • I mean I hold no portfolio to defend Gala,  but I suspect that is their office.  I am a company director,  my home address is also not registered with Companies House. Also guys this is Peckham not Royston Vasey.  Shoreditch is a mere 20 mins away by train, it's not an offshore bolt hole in Luxembourg.
    • While it is good that GALA have withdrawn their application for a second weekend, local people and councillors will likely have the same fight on their hands for next year's event. In reading the consultation report, I noted the Council were putting the GALA event in the same light as all the other events that use the park, like the Circus, the Fair and even the FOPR fete. ALL of those events use the common, not the park, and cause nothing like the level of noise and/or disruption of the GALA event. Even the two day Irish Festival (for those that remember that one) was never as noisy as GALA. So there is some disingenuity and hypocrisy from the Council on this, something I wll point out in my response to the report. The other point to note was that in past years branches were cut back for the fencing. Last year the council promised no trees would be cut after pushback, but they seem to now be reverting to a position of 'only in agreement with the council's arbourist'. Is this more hypocrisy from 'green' Southwark who seem to once again be ok with defacing trees for a fence that is up for just days? The people who now own GALA don't live in this area. GALA as an event began in Brockwell Park. It then lost its place there to bigger events (that pesumably could pay Lambeth Council more). One of the then company directors lived on the Rye Hill Estate next to the park and that is likely how Peckham Rye came to be the new choice for the event. That person is no longer involved. Today's GALA company is not the same as the 'We Are the Fair' company that held that first event, not the same in scope, aim or culture. And therein lies the problem. It's not a local community led enterprise, but a commercial one, underwritten by a venture capital company. The same company co-run the Rally Event each year in Southwark Park, which btw is licensed as a one day event only. That does seem to be truer to the original 'We Are the Fair' vision, but how much of that is down to GALA as opoosed to 'Bird on the Wire' (the other group organising it) is hard to say.  For local people, it's three days of not being able to open windows, As someone said above, if a resident set up a PA in their back garden and subjected the neighbours to 10 hours of hard dance music every day for three days, the Council would take action. Do not underestimate how distressing that is for many local residents, many of whom are elderly, frail, young, vulnerable. They deserve more respect than is being shown by those who think it's no big deal. And just to be clear, GALA and the council do not consider there to be a breach of db level if the level is corrected within 15 minutes of the breach. In other words, while db levels are set as part of the noise management plan, there is an acknowledgement that a breach is ok if corrected within 15 minutes. That is just not good enough. Local councillors objected to the proposed extension. 75% of those that responded to the consultation locally did not want GALA 26 to take place at all. For me personally, any goodwill that had been built up through the various consultations over recent years was erased with that application for a second weekend, and especially given that when asked if there were plans for that in post 2025 event feedback meetings (following rumours), GALA lied and said there were no plans to expand. I have come to the conclusion that all the effort to appease on some things is merely an exercise in show, to get past the council's threshold for the events licence. They couldn't give a hoot in reality for local people, and people that genuinely care about parkland, don't litter it with noisy festivals either.   
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...