Do witness statements have any relevance at a trial?

[G-Unit]

May we have a Cite for that.

In here you'll find the request to interview him along with the other previous occupants of 5A
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RESPONSE-ROGATORY.htm

In here you'll find his name confirming his statement is being sent along with a lot of others.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/FRANCES_KENNAH.htm

[Eleanor]

No it isn't. I don't know who was involved in typing this letter.

So not much cop then.

[Eleanor]

In here you'll find the request to interview him along with the other previous occupants of 5A
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RESPONSE-ROGATORY.htm

In here you'll find his name confirming his statement is being sent along with a lot of others.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/FRANCES_KENNAH.htm

What?  Like The Gaspar Statements, do you mean?

[G-Unit]

What?  Like The Gaspar Statements, do you mean?

I don't quite know what you mean?

[Venturi Swirl]

Leicestershire police, with the rogatory interview requested by the PJ.

So no likelihood of it being a forgery then.

[G-Unit]

So no likelihood of it being a forgery then.

What it is is an unsigned letter, not a police statement. The reason I'm interested in it is the sequence of events. The
letter is dated 06/05/2007.

On 7th January 2008 the contents were leaked to the Evening Standard. The newspaper says 'it was revealed yesterday', but doesn't say by whom. It says ' Mr Gordon was interviewed by Scotland Yard detectives and Metodo 3'. Jeremy Wilkins was interviewed by Scotland Yard and his statement is completely different; it is indeed a police statement.

Mr Gordon, the newspaper admits 'refused to comment about his statement', so who leaked it to the Standard and why?

It was after this newspaper article that LP did an identikit image with Gordon, on 17th January 2007. Seven months after his first 'statement'

[Venturi Swirl]

What it is is an unsigned letter, not a police statement. The reason I'm interested in it is the sequence of events. The
letter is dated 06/05/2007.

On 7th January 2008 the contents were leaked to the Evening Standard. The newspaper says 'it was revealed yesterday', but doesn't say by whom. It says ' Mr Gordon was interviewed by Scotland Yard detectives and Metodo 3'. Jeremy Wilkins was interviewed by Scotland Yard and his statement is completely different; it is indeed a police statement.

Mr Gordon, the newspaper admits 'refused to comment about his statement', so who leaked it to the Standard and why?

It was after this newspaper article that LP did an identikit image with Gordon, on 17th January 2007. Seven months after his first 'statement'

You seem to be smelling a rat unless I am very much mistaken.  But as the paperwork went through the hands of the LP I’m not quite sure what it is you think is going on here.

[G-Unit]

You seem to be smelling a rat unless I am very much mistaken.  But as the paperwork went through the hands of the LP I’m not quite sure what it is you think is going on here.

Why wasn't a proper police statement produced on 6th May 2007? In my opinion it's because  it wasn't the police Gordon spoke  to.

[jassi]

Why wasn't a proper police statement produced on 6th May 2007? In my opinion it's because  it wasn't the police Gordon spoke  to.

Who else might he have contacted?  Or did someone contact him and if so, why so early in the game ?

[G-Unit]

Who else might he have contacted?  Or did someone contact him and if so, why so early in the game ?

I was trying to work that out. He said in his rog interview that he phoned the police in May, but if so why didn't they take a bona fide statement? If someone contacted him who were they? We have been led to believe that no-one else began to investigate until CRG arrived on the scene. 

[Robittybob1]

I was trying to work that out. He said in his rog interview that he phoned the police in May, but if so why didn't they take a bona fide statement? If someone contacted him who were they? We have been led to believe that no-one else began to investigate until CRG arrived on the scene.

Where was he when this interview took place?

In this sentence you talk of a scene "We have been led to believe that no-one else began to investigate until CRG arrived on the scene", am I right thinking the scene was PdL?  What makes you think Paul Gordon was at PdL on the 6th?

Why did you write the date " 6th May 200??"  why the double "??" ?

[G-Unit]

Where was he when this interview took place?

In this sentence you talk of a scene "We have been led to believe that no-one else began to investigate until CRG arrived on the scene", am I right thinking the scene was PdL?  What makes you think Paul Gordon was at PdL on the 6th?

Why did you write the date " 6th May 200??"  why the double "??" ?

He was back in the UK, having returned on 28th April. Jassi asked if someone contacted him, but as I said, only LP and the PJ were investigating before CRG appeared. Saying 'the scene' is a figure of speech, it's not meant to refer to a particular location. The double question marks are a typo.

How come there was no proper police statement taken?

[Robittybob1]

He was back in the UK, having returned on 28th April. Jassi asked if someone contacted him, but as I said, only LP and the PJ were investigating before CRG appeared. Saying 'the scene' is a figure of speech, it's not meant to refer to a particular location. The double question marks are a typo.

How come there was no proper police statement taken?

Right I've amended your post  to remove the double ??.
So why do you think it isn't a "proper police statement"?

[G-Unit]

Right I've amended your post  to remove the double ??.
So why do you think it isn't a "proper police statement"?

It isn't a police statement because it isn't signed and it doesn't include this;

 a declaration by the maker that it is true to the best of his/her knowledge and belief and that it was made knowing that, if it were tendered in evidence, the maker would be liable to prosecution if s/he wilfully stated in it anything which he knew to be false or did not believe to be true (known as a `perjury declaration');
http://www.hse.gov.uk/enforce/enforcementguide/investigation/witness-witness.htm

[Miss Taken Identity]

The accused in any case is legally obliged to answer any questions, including questions about what they told the police in their previous witness statements. That make the answers to those questions admissible evidence.
.

The proscecution can bring to the attention to the court the various interviews and the reconstruction done by the BBC. They can also call witneses to attest what the defendants told them in relatin to the case. ie the Tapas witneses. They can call the PJ and Amaral as witneses against the McCanns by relaying what they were told and how they behaved.

And a clever prosecution team could make a  case based on circumstancial evidence.