Reply #74: You've got a logical fallacy, and this is how it applies:

[Nevernose]

The fact that you can name a bunch of cases in which a child was kidnapped by a stranger in no way changes the fact that most kidnappings are committed by parents, for custody reasons or otherwise. But that's really just nitpicking, since kidnappings wasn't my point (I was thread jumping).

The fact that "some parents abuse their children and kill them" is the most relevant, salient detail to any case involving the presumed death of a child (presuming her death isn't, of course, the most positive way of thinking, but it is the most logical). Excluding disease and accident, the most likely cause of a child's violent death is, sadly, a parent or guardian. Standard SOP, basic Criminology 101, says that -- in the absence of other evidence -- the parents are usually to blame for a child's death.

Therefore, the Portuguese police would be FOOLS not to at least look into the most likely suspects -- one or both parents. Their job is not to be respectful to the parents' feelings or stature in the community, but to protect and serve the victim of a crime. There's only one victim here -- a four year old girl who's missing.

But people are rushing to their defense like they're some kind of martyrs or murderers when they A) haven't actually been accused by the authorities of doing anything illegal, B) have cooperated fully, and C) the public only has the information available to the average tabloid journalist.