.. were made arguidos on suspicion of two crimes: concealing a body and simulating an abduction and potentially the crime of abandonment. But saying they were made arguidos on the merest possibility that they were involved in the disappearance of their child is not true. The conclusions reached by the team investigating the crime, including colleagues in Britain,
and have never been officially cleared of that involvement in spite of how it has been spun to the contrary by a shameful British media, the investigation being shelved for lack of evidence. (read political interference)
These same two persons of interest are trying to stop the good citizens of Britain having the choice as to whether they wish to read, or not, the details about their involvement in the death, concealing the body and simulating the abduction of their daughter Madeleine McCann.
Why? one might ask, something tells me it might be something other than:
"indescribable devastation" to the McCanns, compounding the "immense pain and anxiety" that they had endured since Madeleine's disappearance.
I'm such a bad person to write about these two poor people in such a manner who are so clearly overcome with indescribable devastation, perhaps I won't go to heaven.ETA: That photo alone should be sufficient to have any law suit tossed that is brought on the grounds of "immense pain and anxiety, yada yada yada," just pitch it up on the judges bench and say, Oh yeah! tell me about it.
Case dismissed, all rise.
Thought For Today: There was NO abductor.
................................There was NO evidence of abduction.
................................There was only her parents.
h/t ProfMoriarty.
I do like a simple bit of common sense.
