Quizzes & Puzzles2 mins ago
Public Opinion
12 Answers
Why is the public opinion of the (so-far innocent of any crime) McCanns so different to that shown to a convicted killer - Louise Woodward?
Answers
1 to 12 of 12
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Whickerman. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
neither are the McCanns (Patricide is the wrong word btw - means to kill your father).
They haven't been accused of anything at all, yet the public are spiteful towards them. Louise Woodward received the support of thousands despite being found guilty of the death of a child.
Just curious btw - not stating my opinion on either case...
They haven't been accused of anything at all, yet the public are spiteful towards them. Louise Woodward received the support of thousands despite being found guilty of the death of a child.
Just curious btw - not stating my opinion on either case...
neither have the mcanns cheries. Correct me if im wrong but Patrcidie means the act of killing ones father.
Whickerman - good question. Though only a short period of time has elpased since then (10 years since louise killed Matthew Eappen), society has changed and so have peoples reactions to certain things - sarah Paynes (2000) , Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman (2002)
I feel that people are more vocal and would be more hurt by finding out that the mcanns had hidden the truth due to their blatant acting and fooling the public. The McCanns are seen as proffesionals due to being doctors and therefore the public sees them as supposedly good parents (i beg to differ - leaving akid alone in a hotel in my opinion is unforgivable)...anyway, thats why i feel the public are more vocal about this, basically if innocent, the public feel the mcanns could have avoided this. If not, then they have blatatnly lied to everyone.
Thought I see your point, i feel that the whole "fishyness" of the mcann situation has had a different impact on the public.
Whickerman - good question. Though only a short period of time has elpased since then (10 years since louise killed Matthew Eappen), society has changed and so have peoples reactions to certain things - sarah Paynes (2000) , Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman (2002)
I feel that people are more vocal and would be more hurt by finding out that the mcanns had hidden the truth due to their blatant acting and fooling the public. The McCanns are seen as proffesionals due to being doctors and therefore the public sees them as supposedly good parents (i beg to differ - leaving akid alone in a hotel in my opinion is unforgivable)...anyway, thats why i feel the public are more vocal about this, basically if innocent, the public feel the mcanns could have avoided this. If not, then they have blatatnly lied to everyone.
Thought I see your point, i feel that the whole "fishyness" of the mcann situation has had a different impact on the public.
I would never support Louise Woodward
The McCanns would possible find a bit more support if they were seen to be a bit more open about what happened that night, but Im finding it harder and harder to believe that its all as innocent as we are told.
Dont ask me why because i dont know, i just think that there is more to it than parents who left their 3 very young children in a hotel room whilst they went out for dinner and by some coincidence a childnapper chose that same room to take a child from.
And it was just one child, one that could talk and express her fear to any passing stranger rather than 2 babies who didnt even wake and wouldnt have been able to cry out for anyone.
I would love to be proved wrong in my instincts though, i really would.
The McCanns would possible find a bit more support if they were seen to be a bit more open about what happened that night, but Im finding it harder and harder to believe that its all as innocent as we are told.
Dont ask me why because i dont know, i just think that there is more to it than parents who left their 3 very young children in a hotel room whilst they went out for dinner and by some coincidence a childnapper chose that same room to take a child from.
And it was just one child, one that could talk and express her fear to any passing stranger rather than 2 babies who didnt even wake and wouldnt have been able to cry out for anyone.
I would love to be proved wrong in my instincts though, i really would.
The public (or rather the media) has a tendency to get on its high horse about things (note that I do think it was daft for the McCanns to leave their daughter in a hotel room, but I'm a good deal more condemning of their rather snooty treatment by certain sectors of the public).
[disclaimer: the following statement is merely an opinion. I have no really credibly evidence for this, it's just a kind of hunch]
I think it stems essentially in a media-stirred culture where people at a conscious or subconscious level just enjoy being very critical of others. Listen, for instance, to any group of Big Brother fans discussing the show and they'll instantly start looking down their nose on whoever they dislike personally and heaping praise on whoever they think is a 'good person'. One might also note that I'm doing almost exactly the same thing right now in writing this, and multiple ABers also do it consistantly.
I'm not sure this is a new thing at all, but it's certainly made easier by the growth of media (and the ability of the media to be selective). As I say, I have no credibly evidence for this - it's just based on my own observation and experience and what I think seems to fit.
[disclaimer: the following statement is merely an opinion. I have no really credibly evidence for this, it's just a kind of hunch]
I think it stems essentially in a media-stirred culture where people at a conscious or subconscious level just enjoy being very critical of others. Listen, for instance, to any group of Big Brother fans discussing the show and they'll instantly start looking down their nose on whoever they dislike personally and heaping praise on whoever they think is a 'good person'. One might also note that I'm doing almost exactly the same thing right now in writing this, and multiple ABers also do it consistantly.
I'm not sure this is a new thing at all, but it's certainly made easier by the growth of media (and the ability of the media to be selective). As I say, I have no credibly evidence for this - it's just based on my own observation and experience and what I think seems to fit.
redcrx... the McCanns are not allowed to be more open . They have been forbidden to talk about what happened that night by the PJ. There is nothing suspicious about their silence on the matter. What is suspicious is the original investigation and the leaks and rumours fed to the press. It is they who are responsible for this media circus. Can you not see that you are being manipulated, and the McCanns are being unfairly persecuted. Yes they did leave their children unattended . They have been severely punished for this (I wont state the obvious) Any person with half a brain knows that all the stories in the press cannot be true. So what is fact and what is fiction? none of us knows. So how can any one of us make a fair judgement yet
As for the Louise Woodward trial and conviction. I watched it all on the TV. They did not convince me that she did anything to harm that child. I dont think they convinced the judge either. Other wise he would not have given her such a lenient sentence. Personally I dont think anyone deliberately harmed that child.
As for the Louise Woodward trial and conviction. I watched it all on the TV. They did not convince me that she did anything to harm that child. I dont think they convinced the judge either. Other wise he would not have given her such a lenient sentence. Personally I dont think anyone deliberately harmed that child.
Persian lady
The McCanns are forbidden to talk about it? Then where has their spokesman, Clarence Mitchell, being getting all the information he has been feeding to the press, person seen on stairwell, mysterious witnesses that wish to remain annonymous etc. Generally I think the British press has been supportive of them, thanks obviously to his contacts. However I think some of the rubbish he has come out with has done their case no good at all.
The persecution has come from the Portgugese gutter press whose statements are invariably from an unnamed police source. The police have neither denied or confirmed these statements because of their silence rule so they could be totally fabricated by their press.
In other words we can't be sure of the Portgugese sources but we know where the McCanns statements are coming from.
Also the police did voice concern, some weeks ago,about the information being released on their behalf, in relation to their duty as suspects to remain silent.
The McCanns are forbidden to talk about it? Then where has their spokesman, Clarence Mitchell, being getting all the information he has been feeding to the press, person seen on stairwell, mysterious witnesses that wish to remain annonymous etc. Generally I think the British press has been supportive of them, thanks obviously to his contacts. However I think some of the rubbish he has come out with has done their case no good at all.
The persecution has come from the Portgugese gutter press whose statements are invariably from an unnamed police source. The police have neither denied or confirmed these statements because of their silence rule so they could be totally fabricated by their press.
In other words we can't be sure of the Portgugese sources but we know where the McCanns statements are coming from.
Also the police did voice concern, some weeks ago,about the information being released on their behalf, in relation to their duty as suspects to remain silent.
Chompu
Damned if they do.damned if they dont.. If it was my daughter and I had not killed her accidentally or deliberately, absolutely knew that she had been abducted then I would find it impossible to keep quiet . Wouldn't you?
They are in impossible and in my opinion unfair position.
Who , apart from the McCanns and their "team" are actively looking for Madeleine? The police? I hope they are now. But in the early days of the investigation , it was obvious that they were not. Why are the public hanging on to every word that is printed, most of it critical of the Mccanns. None of it helpful to Madeleine if she is still alive. If it was not so serious it would be comical, the way some people, press and the public ,are behaving. Its like an episode of Midsomer Murders, with so many red herrings, and you are led to suspect almost everyone. And the culprit turns out to be the very last person you would expect.
The McCanns do not court all this publicity for themselves, most of it is directed at them by one malicious headline after another. Nearly all of them intentionally or not intentionally taking the focus away from Madeleine.
Why should their spokesman not respond to the latest
press allegation? Why shouldn't they release details of a tip off to the public? I would. I certainly would have by now lost any faith in the PJ finding out what really happened.
Incidentally it was a Mark Warner employee who alleged that she saw a man lurking in the stairwell.
Damned if they do.damned if they dont.. If it was my daughter and I had not killed her accidentally or deliberately, absolutely knew that she had been abducted then I would find it impossible to keep quiet . Wouldn't you?
They are in impossible and in my opinion unfair position.
Who , apart from the McCanns and their "team" are actively looking for Madeleine? The police? I hope they are now. But in the early days of the investigation , it was obvious that they were not. Why are the public hanging on to every word that is printed, most of it critical of the Mccanns. None of it helpful to Madeleine if she is still alive. If it was not so serious it would be comical, the way some people, press and the public ,are behaving. Its like an episode of Midsomer Murders, with so many red herrings, and you are led to suspect almost everyone. And the culprit turns out to be the very last person you would expect.
The McCanns do not court all this publicity for themselves, most of it is directed at them by one malicious headline after another. Nearly all of them intentionally or not intentionally taking the focus away from Madeleine.
Why should their spokesman not respond to the latest
press allegation? Why shouldn't they release details of a tip off to the public? I would. I certainly would have by now lost any faith in the PJ finding out what really happened.
Incidentally it was a Mark Warner employee who alleged that she saw a man lurking in the stairwell.
1 to 12 of 12
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles5 mins ago
ChatterBank9 mins ago
ChatterBank29 mins ago
Crosswords37 mins ago
