Freitag, 13. Juni 2014

Presumption of Innocence

The parents killed her. British police are stupid.

I have been asked many times the question why I don't respect the presumption of innocence in this case, especially by people that know me and my usual respect for human rights. It is not easy to explain.

From the time the news broke in May 2007 until the release of the police files, I had been very much a fence-sitter trying mostly to shed some light onto the hundreds of conflicting news reports. At that time I even was posting under the name Impartial on the Mirror forum and 3As. I could see the discrepancies, the changes to their statements via the media but I could also see two people devastated by the loss of their daughter.

During these months I kept the presumption of innocence high. Even though suspicions became stronger by the day it was my private opinion that even if there had been a terrible accident and the parents had somehow felt the need to cover-up her death in order to avoid repercussions to their other children, the children in the group, their jobs and reputation it was up to the law to investigate, charge, judge and sentence those responsible for it.

This still would be my stance today had it all stopped there. Had there not been added crimes to the original crime. Additional crimes that would never get followed up if the original crime would not be solved.

The crime of fraud for one. Taking money from schoolchildren, old age pensioners and well-meaning mothers. And not to be invested into a fake search for the missing child but very explicitly invested into the build-up of a defense wall that would avoid the proper prosecution of the original crime. Cheating the course of law if you like.

But it was the crime of deliberately casting wrong suspicions on another person that then caused me to drop my caution and restraint. The way in which Robert Murat had been set up by four of the friends of the McCanns, how his life and that of his mother and fiance had been shredded to pieces only because he was "too" helpful, happened to live in the direction of Jane's concocted sighting and coincidentally was also the person to translate the important statements of Dianne Webster and the nannies was my breaking point. In order to get justice for this crime the first one would have to be cleared up. Otherwise there would never be evidence of this follow-up crime. Compensation money by a paper that had been a victim itself was not a substitute for good old proper justice.

Last but not least it was the parents' atrocious treatment of the one man who had committed himself to finding out what had happened to their daughter: Goncalo Amaral
The vicious, vindictive, hate-filled persecution and destruction of another good man was the last straw that changed my view about a highly cherished good, the presumption of innocence. The law is clear, and no mere mortal can change it, but on this blog it was cast aside after the evaluation of the evidence of the police files to express the desire for the truth to be revealed, to put a stop to the never-ending destruction of people and the creation of a parallel universe built on lies and deception.


  1. Brilliant post!
    How much employees of the Ocean Club holiday facility in Praia da Luz have lost their jobs?
    And only recently the widow of an alleged suspect lost her job because of the suspicion on her husband. Those responsible have burdened themselves with incredible guilt and have to be stopped instantly! Cody.

  2. It may be because I am British and picked up on the slight nuances that a non-Brit may miss that I wasn't convinced by their story from the very beginning.
    I watched the original, Friday morning, broadcast and interview with the McCanns and was immediately convinced that they had played some part in their daughters disappearance. In fact, so much so, that I went to work that morning and communicated my thoughts to several work colleagues.

    Nothing, absolutely nothing, that I have seen, heard or read in the intervening 7 years has caused me to change my initial impression.


    1. Hi Spook,
      "On the fence" was refering to my public posts under the presumption of innocence. Not my personal opinion. I entered the debate at the time of the german press conference and had my suspicions from that day. But only the release of the files and the extend of the additional crimes got me to publicly voice the suspicions in the hope to add some pressure on the LE authorities to not let it be swept under the carpet.

    2. Hi - I completely share your opinion. The parents looked scared and shifty -they were worried about what would happen to THEM, not about what had happened, worse, what might be happening to their child at that precise moment. As a mother of three girls myself I pictured myself in their situation: I would have been frantic with fear -not paralyzed like rabbits studied by a hungry cobra! - And everything they said sounded convoluted and rehearsed and false, and they positively avoided saying anything spontaneous and natural.
      Besides when I heard them claiming again and again that they were absolutely sure that their kids would not wake up during the night -what parent can say that with any amount of certainty? Especially not if said children had just spent exciting, adventure-filled days (Remember: it was supposed to have been the best day of Madeleine's short life!) in an unfamiliar environment. But when they insisted I thought that they had probably given them some strong medication - soemthig a layperson would not dare to administer to babies but which they, as doctors, felt they could risk for the sake of an undisturbed evening out with their friends. This assumption was strengthened when I heard that this group of 'responsible parents' had left not just three but eight children under four alone, night after night, and one of them a baby with bouts of vomiting and diarrhoea.
      And when I heard they had actually managed to sleep in the first night after the alleged abduction (and even complaining that sleep had not come easy - as if it would!), slept while thinking their precious daughter was in the hands of pedophiles, when I saw them grinning and smirking in the church and on their balcony a few days later, and when ALL their reactions, all their shrugs and looks and gestures, all their statements were so utterly different from what mine would have been in their situation I was sure something was wrong.

      For a time I thought it was a major hoax, perhaps some agency testing how to use the internet to spread rumours, or a huge money laundering operation, but probably it is just a case of a bunch of immoral, shallow and utterly selfish people lacking the courage to accept responsibility for a 'mistake' that, tragically, cost a child's life..

    3. I get your sentiment but I always caution people to judge by appearances rather than facts. And to be careful about cause and effect of something we witness. They lied from day 1. IMO they also lied when they said they were 100% sure she did not wake and wander. But they did not lie because she was sedated but because that would implicate neglect. They did not know that Mrs. Fenn had heard the long crying session on Tuesday. Sedated children don't cry for over an hour for their father.

  3. Well said. This is one of the most depressing examples cognitive dissonance on a grand scale that I can think of in our world today. The extent to which the logic of lies has been pursued in the police and media investigations of this case would not have been believable prior to 9/11, the established paradigm of the logical pursuit and elaboration of an agreed upon lie by media and arms of government.

    I don't think there is a remedy for this. People are too stupid and the people they elect are too corrupted. I shudder to think what is coming to engulf us all.

    That being said, the job of the sage is to do his duty. Thank you for doing yours.