General discussion about the latest news (not search related)

[Mr Gray]

I know but I'm wondering if Amaral still has people who are keeping him up to date on events. If a German suspect does appear then it would appear so.

based on the evidence...I would say he certainly does

[Angelo222]

I know but I'm wondering if Amaral still has people who are keeping him up to date on events. If a German suspect does appear then it would appear so.

Amaral will still have his sources within the PJ so they obviously were aware of this so-called suspect some weeks ago but decided to sit on it publicly until nearer to the 12th anniversary.  It's probably some German prisoner looking for his moment of fame, just like has happened several times previously.

[Mr Gray]

Amaral will still have his sources within the PJ so they obviously were aware of this so-called suspect some weeks ago but decided to sit on it publicly until nearer to the 12th anniversary.  It's probably some German prisoner looking for his moment of fame, just like has happened several times previously.

so you are now claiming the PJ sat on it.......until the anniversary...so as to help the mccanns....so amaral has sat on it too...bless him.

[Venturi Swirl]

Amaral will still have his sources within the PJ so they obviously were aware of this so-called suspect some weeks ago but decided to sit on it publicly until nearer to the 12th anniversary.  It's probably some German prisoner looking for his moment of fame, just like has happened several times previously.

Can you explain this comment please.

[Venturi Swirl]

Based on the evidence I'd say he may do but I'm not aware of any evidence that makes it certain at this stage. I certainly hope he does because if they do charge anyone that's going to be interesting.

I think personally they'd need really hard, solid, concrete evidence to get a conviction,. because I can't see any scenario where the defence doesn't call the tapas 9 as defence witnesses. There would be no 48 no comments from the witness box then.

You seem to be under the impression that a trial of an alleged abductor would be more of a trial of the McCanns and their friends, can you explain your rationale?

[Brietta]

What proof do you have to support that claim? There were witnesses in the van , how do you know they failed to record the details?  It's not too late to get them to testify to the events that unfolded in the van.

I don't see how she can't sue if the documentary was broadcasting malicious lies about her actions that weren't true.
If she can't sue, it can only be because she know she did tell the police she "thought is was" Murat she seen imo.

It matters little now anyway, the documentary claims she did as a matter of fact.
What else is there to say?

Just that it calls into question the integrity of the documentary.

[Mr Gray]

Based on the evidence I'd say he may do but I'm not aware of any evidence that makes it certain at this stage. I certainly hope he does because if they do charge anyone that's going to be interesting.

I think personally they'd need really hard, solid, concrete evidence to get a conviction,. because I can't see any scenario where the defence doesn't call the tapas 9 as defence witnesses. There would be no 48 no comments from the witness box then.

I think you are dreaming..the suspect would be tried on the evidence against him...not on any of the tapas testimonies

[Brietta]

I'm not aware of any Madeleine McCann documentary that has integrity. It doesn't alter the fact the latest one tells it's millions of viewers that Jane Tanner positively identified Robert Murat from the van as a matter of fact.
Are we not going in circles on this? I don't mind if that's what you want, I like getting dizzy now and again..

You go in circles if you wish.  Like Jane Tanner ... I am not deviating from the fact that she never ID Murat.

Common sense should inform you that had she done so there would have been a signed statement to that effect in the files.

[Mr Gray]

I'm sure a charge will settle that issue once and for all. The defense solicitors job is to create reasonable in the juries mind on behalf of their client. I personally think you're dreaming if you think they would fail to use the testimony of the tapas 9 to create that doubt.

could you explain in what way the testimony of the tapas could create doubt

[Brietta]

I'm sure a charge will settle that issue once and for all. The defense solicitors job is to create reasonable in the juries mind on behalf of their client. I personally think you're dreaming if you think they would fail to use the testimony of the tapas 9 to create that doubt.

The proof will be in the pudding if it occurs won't it?

That is utterly fantastical.

[Mr Gray]

I'm sure a charge will settle that issue once and for all. The defense solicitors job is to create reasonable in the juries mind on behalf of their client. I personally think you're dreaming if you think they would fail to use the testimony of the tapas 9 to create that doubt.

The proof will be in the pudding if it occurs won't it?

like...how come you didnt see me when I abducted your daughter

[Mr Gray]

I don't follow sorry? I think if you hired a donkey to defend you, they'd come up with better than that.

no its ..if you defend yourself you have a fool for a client...

so how would the tapas testimony be in any way useful..what questions would the defence ask

[Brietta]

I'm not deviating from the fact that I never claimed she ID'd him either. I'll repeat that for you. I have NEVER claimed she ID'd Murat, as it seems to be failing to sink in.. but I am standing firm with the documented proof of my claim that the documentary states as fact that she did, exactly as I stated?

Use your common sense and try to understand your misunderstanding. (I have NEVER claimed Tanner ID'd Murat. I have claimed the documentary done it, because the fact is, the documentary did do it as you fine well know it did.

Dearie, dearie me! The truth is the truth, if you can't accept it, perhaps you should take a break.

Then you have promulgated a lie repeatedly and with vigour ...  why would anyone wish to do such a thing.

[kizzy]

no its ..if you defend yourself you have a fool for a client...

so how would the tapas testimony be in any way useful..what questions would the defence ask

so how would the tapas testimony be in any way useful..what questions would the defence ask





Well, I would think the timeline for a start.

Surely they would want to know - where were you between nine and ten o'clock 0n the 3/5/2007.

What if he has an alibi -  where he was when the so-called abduction took place 

[Venturi Swirl]

so how would the tapas testimony be in any way useful..what questions would the defence ask





Well, I would think the timeline for a start.

Surely they would want to know - where were you between nine and ten o'clock 0n the 3/5/2007.

What if he has an alibi -  where he was when the so-called abduction took place 

if he had a cast iron alibi he wouldn’t end up in court would he?