Lying in the Sun

Children's Rights

Children’s Rights

Diary Entry

Saturday, June 2nd


"Whose human rights are more important, those of a paedophile or of a vulnerable defenceless child?"




Interesting that Kate McCann should pose the above question as I have a similar one she may wish to answer:


Whose human rights are more important those of selfish parents who thought only of themselves, their own needs and in so doing abandoned their children, failing in their duty of care to these children, OR those of a vulnerable defenceless child?


More interesting is that Kate McCann is describing Madeleine as a vulnerable defenceless child?’


So in June 2007 she did understand and recognise that the position she left her three children, was one where her children were left ‘vulnerable’


In June 2007 she did also understand and recognise that Madeleine, Sean and Amelie were defenceless children!

Well of course she/they did - they are fooling no one with - 'we felt it was safe!'

Yeh, about as safe as sticking the kids in a hungry lions den and popping back ever half hour to 'listen for their screams' Expecting them to come out of it unscathed!  I can see Kate McCann 'listening' at the "den door" - 'oh all quiet' as she would say, taking this to mean, all was well - then noticing Lenny licking his lips his mouth more widely open...

Yet Gerry and Kate McCann have since the disappearance of their daughter repeatedly stated that what they did to their children was ‘within the bounds of responsible parenting.’


It quite obviously was not!

And quite obviously they know it!


Why else did they immediately seek legal advice in this regard asking, if what they did to their kids was okay?   I know, I know, two doctors having to seek legal advice to ask if how they treat their children is legal and proper!


What they were really asking was – ‘can we ‘go down’ for this?' – because they knew it wasn’t - and for how long?’

For sure they were not seeking advice on how to brush up on their parenting skills.

Always a bit of doubt attached to this story too, as it did not filter through to the public untainted – it had a pink tinge – so every chance and reason to believe it was invented to cover the neglect issue!


It is another of those statements that just because Clarence Mitchell or the McCanns made it, does not make it true.


And these three are peas in a pod! 


Quite probably they sought legal advice that much I would give them, but it is the response/advice that is in grave doubt – that a lawyer understanding Portuguese Law would instruct them that they acted within the bounds of responsible parenting?


Reading the Portuguese Judicial Code – Exposure or Abandonment - I would have to say that Gerry and Kate McCann – ‘tick all the boxes’ and the fact they left that door unlocked really doesn’t help matters!


But if there is any uncertainty in Kate’s mind as to the ‘rights’ of her vulnerable and defenceless child, and as to the punishment for those who leave their children/and or other vulnerable defenceless persons in a position where their life is endangered ….read on!



Portuguese Judicial Code
Article 138

Exposure or abandonment

1 - Whom endangers the life of another person:

a) By exposing her in a place where the person is subject to a situation which she cannot defend herself from on her own; or

b) By abandoning her in a defenseless state, for motive of age, physical defect or illness, when the agent had the duty to guard, watch or assist to the person;

is punished with a prison term of 1 to 5years.

2 - If the fact is practised by an ascendant ;or descendant, adoptant or adoptee of the victim, the agent is punished with a prison term of 2 to 5 years.

3 - If the fact results in:

a) Serious offense to the physical integrity, the agent is punished with a prison term of 2 to 8 years;

b) Death, the agent is punished with a prison term of 3 to 10 years.
28th July 2013

Website Builder