He may well not prove the same man that Amaral was referencing.... but considering how many papers get sued over misinformation in this case plus the hours they took to publis the name Martin Ney and his connection to Portugal - you can assume they had good sources. Additionally, if they are correct and you re-listen to the podcast - Amaral claims that the PJ interviewed him. So I can only assume that if all their information is correct - and if it is indeed he that Amaral referenced - then wherever he was - he was pretty damn near PDL.
Is it possible that Amaral is wrong or Ney is not the paedophile he was talking about ?
Ney was never questioned by the PJ. The parent’s detectives had him in their sights but I don’t believe they interviewed him either.
Clarence does seem rather too keen to put Ney in the frame.....he is reported as saying that he fits the ‘profile’ though even a very cursory reading of the facts show that’s untrue. In fact that Clarence is commenting at all seems to fly in the face of OG alleged request for silence from the parents and their representatives.