-
Lawyers attack MP's attitude in Cova da Moura investigation
Justice
01 AUGUST 2017
00:13
Filipa Ambrósio de Sousa
Leader of Lisbon Lawyers argues that a statement made by Maria José Morgado concerning the 18 PSP agents accused of mistreatment is excessive and respects neither the presumption of innocence nor the contradictory
Reports that are too revealing of ongoing investigations, which do not respect the principle of the adversary or the constitutional principle of the presumption of innocence. The criticisms - made by the Lisbon regional leader of the Portuguese Bar Association (António Jaime Martins) - are addressed to a specific addressee: the District Attorney General of Lisbon (pgdl), led by Maria José Morgado. And an identified court case: the accusation of racism and maltreatment made to 18 PSP agents, made public on July 11 on the pgdl website.
"The kind of clarification that is being provided on the official website of some judicial authorities does not contribute either to the safety of people or property, or to public tranquility, quite the contrary," says António Jaime Martins on his Facebook page , With an attached print screen of the communiqué related to the Cova da Moura investigation, published by pgdl. "In addition, those targeted by the investigations have no right to the adversary using the same means and the presumption of innocence is called into question," says the lawyer to the DN.
Maria José Morgado, with her own contradiction, considers that "throughout the civilized world the courts, the Public Ministry and the police publicize their activity as a form of accountability to the community", explains the Deputy Attorney General, in Declarations to DN.
In the pgdl website, on July 11, this communiqué included the crimes for which the accused were accused (falsification of aggravated document, slanderous denunciation, aggravated offense, offense to qualified physical integrity, false witness, torture and other cruel, Degrading or inhuman acts and aggravated kidnapping. ") The same publication also stated that the agents" abused the function and violation of their duties and uttered expressions that offended the body and honor of the offended. " The note ended with the measure of coercion applied (term of identity and residence).
Maria José Morgado argues that "the news is objective and neutral information about a procedural data, in this case the deduction of an accusation." "The principle of the presumption of innocence is part of the rules of production of evidence at the hearing, with the rule of absolution of any defendant at the slightest doubt." The judgment ensures the application of this principle of proof. Very different realities and for very different purposes, "concludes Deputy Attorney General DN.
And what does the law say? The Code of Criminal Procedure defines "the provision of public clarification by the judicial authority where it is necessary for the restoration of the truth and does not prejudice the investigation, either at the request of persons publicly challenged or to ensure the safety of persons and Goods or public tranquility ".
But António Jaime Martins considers that "the usual, even daily, character of these communiqués makes it possible even in cases where justice is not mediated, from that moment on." The head of the Bar also adds that these clarifications are made "only from the perspective of those who investigate, without the defendants whose identity is generally reported by the media, have the faculty to present their version of the facts. It is necessary to ask where is the principle of the presumption of innocence of the visas until judicial decision. Purely and simply, it does not exist ".
http://www.dn.pt/portugal/interior/advogados-atacam-atitude-do-ministerio-publico-na-investigacao-dacova-da-moura-8675712.html?utm_source=Push&utm_medium=Web
A few interesting similarities came to mind with the situation the McCanns found themselves in with regard to Portuguese Justice and the case above, concerning the police presently under accusation of heavy handedness concerning categories of certain citizens of the Republic.
John Stalker, who believes Madeleine was abducted, was aware that at the time nothing was being divulged from the McCann side.
Snip
" One thing above all worries me: Why have the McCanns and the seven other members of their group – the Tapas Nine – remained so silent?"
“I have a real suspicion that we are not being told the whole truth. There is something else there, some issue that members of the party are embarrassed about”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-490254/McCanns-hiding-big-secret-police-chief claims.html#ixzz4oUWdB02t
The answer for their restraint was of course Judicial Secrecy Laws and the penalties for them if breaking their silence to defend against the lies being told about them.
Filipa Ambrósio de Sousa's report on JUSTICE is the first I have read suggesting the presumption of innocence being compromised ... on this occasion, when the police are on the receiving end of the restriction.
93
-
If the group, according to Stalker, appeared to be hiding something they have never, in my opinion, offered any clarification since they were free to speak.
-
If the group, according to Stalker, appeared to be hiding something they have never, in my opinion, offered any clarification since they were free to speak.
Clarification of what exactly?
-
Clarification of what exactly?
Whatever it was that they couldn't talk about due to Judicial secrecy.
-
Whatever it was that they couldn't talk about due to Judicial secrecy.
Perhaps you may find clarity here ... where there are actually a few informative posts worth reading ...
Topic: Portuguese judicial secrecy laws explained
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=5795.0
-
Perhaps you may find clarity here ... where there are actually a few informative posts worth reading ...
Topic: Portuguese judicial secrecy laws explained
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=5795.0
You said in previous post;
The answer for their restraint was of course Judicial Secrecy Laws and the penalties for them if breaking their silence to defend against the lies being told about them.
I merely observed that there was no need for that restraint subsequently.
-
You said in previous post;
The answer for their restraint was of course Judicial Secrecy Laws and the penalties for them if breaking their silence to defend against the lies being told about them.
I merely observed that there was no need for that restraint subsequently.
You really do not have a clue about restraints if any, on individuals who are really none of your concern, therefore your observation should be noted as "opinion".
The narrative at the time was formulated by 'a source close to the investigation' and is the one to which Stalker refers.
The majority of which was nullified with the release of the actual forensic reports which had been so incompetently misinterpreted by the investigation.
-
You said in previous post;
The answer for their restraint was of course Judicial Secrecy Laws and the penalties for them if breaking their silence to defend against the lies being told about them.
I merely observed that there was no need for that restraint subsequently.
The lies told about them publicly resulted in newspapers having to pay compensation to them. That should have been enough to confirm to the general public that they had been libelled. No newspaper is going to pay up - unless they know they haven't got a leg to stand on.
I'm sure they will have discussed the case with people of their own choice. They are not public property and no-one has the right to demand that they speak to anyone about what is manifestly their own business.
AIMHO
-
You really do not have a clue about restraints if any, on individuals who are really none of your concern, therefore your observation should be noted as "opinion".
The narrative at the time was formulated by 'a source close to the investigation' and is the one to which Stalker refers.
The majority of which was nullified with the release of the actual forensic reports which had been so incompetently misinterpreted by the investigation.
It is you who expressed an opinion; that they were silent due to Judicial secrecy requirements.
-
The lies told about them publicly resulted in newspapers having to pay compensation to them. That should have been enough to confirm to the general public that they had been libelled. No newspaper is going to pay up - unless they know they haven't got a leg to stand on.
I'm sure they will have discussed the case with people of their own choice. They are not public property and no-one has the right to demand that they speak to anyone about what is manifestly their own business.
AIMHO
Who is demanding they speak? Not I. I merely pointed out to Brietta that Judicial secrecy wasn't necessarily the reason they remained silent.
-
It is you who expressed an opinion; that they were silent due to Judicial secrecy requirements.
Portuguese Judicial Secrecy Laws are a fact.
-
Portuguese Judicial Secrecy Laws are a fact.
But the reason for their silence can only be an opinion.
-
But the reason for their silence can only be an opinion.
I don't agree. Whatever other reason some might wish to imagine, Judicial Secrecy has to be first and foremost because silence is demanded by law. This is a fact.
-
I don't agree. Whatever other reason some might wish to imagine, Judicial Secrecy has to be first and foremost because silence is demanded by law. This is a fact.
It became irrelevant after August 2008, and that is also a fact.
-
It became irrelevant after August 2008, and that is also a fact.
Irrelevant in more ways than one. Or is there something in particular that you would like The McCanns to discuss?
-
But the reason for their silence can only be an opinion.
You as a moderator are presumed to have an inkling of the basics of the case; the least of which is knowledge of judicial secrecy laws in Portugal.
Snip
Speaking from London, Mrs Oldfield said that she was not able to talk about the investigation, because of strict judicial secrecy laws in Portugal, but that the group were increasingly frustrated by a series of leaks and wild speculation.
She said: "I think there are some leaks coming from the police but a lot of what I have read recently has been completely untrue.
**** **** **** **** ****
Mrs Oldfield said: "They are throwing mud at us and we are not able to defend ourselves. It does not help to find Madeleine. We just have to hope the investigation progresses to a point where something concrete comes out of it."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1559784/Madeleine-holiday-friends-attack-police-smears.html
-
You as a moderator are presumed to have an inkling of the basics of the case; the least of which is knowledge of judicial secrecy laws in Portugal.
Snip
Speaking from London, Mrs Oldfield said that she was not able to talk about the investigation, because of strict judicial secrecy laws in Portugal, but that the group were increasingly frustrated by a series of leaks and wild speculation.
She said: "I think there are some leaks coming from the police but a lot of what I have read recently has been completely untrue.
**** **** **** **** ****
Mrs Oldfield said: "They are throwing mud at us and we are not able to defend ourselves. It does not help to find Madeleine. We just have to hope the investigation progresses to a point where something concrete comes out of it."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1559784/Madeleine-holiday-friends-attack-police-smears.html
In what way is a media report dated 8 Aug 2007 relevant to a discussion about the T7 silence after the case was shelved in 2008?
And how did the thread deviate so much from the topic title? ETA This thread has now been split off from its prior location, so we can have a jolly argy-bargy about the T9 (et al) and what they could and did say pre and post archiving.
-
In what way is a media report dated 8 Aug 2007 relevant to a discussion about the T7 silence after the case was shelved in 2008?
And how did the thread deviate so much from the topic title?
If you refer to Brietta's post #208, you will see the parallels regarding presumption of innocence for those bound by judicial secrecy versus the release of information by the investigative body who appear to have breached the same constraints.
Stalker's comments about a possible secret were made in October 2007, well before the case was shelved & the files released to the public. Given that there have been very few media statements from any arguidos or witnesses to the events since 2008, I do not find it strange that any of the T7 have maintained a silence, especially if they have nothing further to add to what is already known.
-
If you refer to Brietta's post #208, you will see the parallels regarding presumption of innocence for those bound by judicial secrecy versus the release of information by the investigative body who appear to have breached the same constraints.
Stalker's comments about a possible secret were made in October 2007, well before the case was shelved & the files released to the public. Given that there have been very few media statements from any arguidos or witnesses to the events since 2008, I do not find it strange that any of the T7 have maintained a silence, especially if they have nothing further to add to what is already known.
Stalker sensed there was something was being hidden and he wasn't the only one. If he was right they were silent because of that, not because of Judicial secrecy. Mrs Oldfield et al were as free to speak as anyone else when the case was archived, but never did.
-
Synopsis.
In Portugal public criminal proceedings are in three stages
Inquiry
Bringing to Justice
Trial.
Pre Aug 29th/31st 2007 the inquiry stage only was subject to judicial secrecy although it seems the PP could make public items that he felt would help the inquiry.
Since 29th/31st August 2007 none of the proceedings is secret.
It is not clear whether the lifting of secrecy for the inquiry stage was retrospective.
There is a right to the presumption of innocence for anyone with arguido status.
If you have £120.00 (or £104.00 on Kindle) to spare it's in here :
https://www.bloomsbury.com/in/toward-a-prosecutor-for-the-european-union-volume-1-9781782250456/
You will not find a full review of The Portuguese bit on that tinternet so buy it or find it in your local reference library. It makes for some interesting reading along with an eye opener to all the chaff that's been dropped on this topic.
-
Synopsis.
In Portugal public criminal proceedings are in three stages
Inquiry
Bringing to Justice
Trial.
Pre Aug 29th/31st 2007 the inquiry stage only was subject to judicial secrecy although it seems the PP could make public items that he felt would help the inquiry.
Since 29th/31st August 2007 none of the proceedings is secret.
It is not clear whether the lifting of secrecy for the inquiry stage was retrospective.
There is a right to the presumption of innocence for anyone with arguido status.
If you have £120.00 (or £104.00 on Kindle) to spare it's in here :
https://www.bloomsbury.com/in/toward-a-prosecutor-for-the-european-union-volume-1-9781782250456/
You will not find a full review of The Portuguese bit on that tinternet so buy it or find it in your local reference library. It makes for some interesting reading along with an eye opener to all the chaff that's been dropped on this topic.
As I'm not as rich as you, I have to rely on the situation as reported at the time.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2008/jul/01/madeleinemccann.ukcrime
*snipped*
In a brief statement sent to the Guardian, the attorney-general's office said a "final report" prepared by the police would be carefully considered.
It added: "The public prosecutor's office will proceed with the global analysis and evaluation of the whole case in order to determine whether or not the necessary and sufficient conditions have been united allowing for the case's closure and subsequent preparation of a final report."
The statement ended with the note: "The case remains under judicial secrecy until mid-August."
-
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=UoLbBAAAQBAJ&pg=PA583&lpg=PA583&dq=judicial+secrecy+during+investigative+stage+in+portugal&source=bl&ots=Aauw4d5ElV&sig=CEFQ4tevnx1uQDFj2L2U9nwMlr0&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiM7pCN-bjVAhUFCsAKHZINBTEQ6AEIYTAJ#v=onepage&q=judicial%20secrecy%20during%20investigative%20stage%20in%20portugal&f=false
The PP can still request judicial secrecy if necessary.
-
I don't agree. Whatever other reason some might wish to imagine, Judicial Secrecy has to be first and foremost because silence is demanded by law. This is a fact.
Deciding what someone's personal reason for doing something can only ever be an opinion, unless that person has told you their reasons.
-
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=UoLbBAAAQBAJ&pg=PA583&lpg=PA583&dq=judicial+secrecy+during+investigative+stage+in+portugal&source=bl&ots=Aauw4d5ElV&sig=CEFQ4tevnx1uQDFj2L2U9nwMlr0&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiM7pCN-bjVAhUFCsAKHZINBTEQ6AEIYTAJ#v=onepage&q=judicial%20secrecy%20during%20investigative%20stage%20in%20portugal&f=false
The PP can still request judicial secrecy if necessary.
He can so too but I didn't say he couldn't.
My thrust was that if you want to find out about Portuguese Law go to the source not the MSM.
p.s I didn't buy the book I found it in the reference section of a library whilst looking for something else about EU Law. I read the Portuguese paper which as I said shows just how much chaff has been dropped on the McCann case.
There is a review of the book on google but several pages are omitted within each paper so one is unable to obtain the full picture.
RTFM
-
I can imagine it is difficult for any suspect/arguido who is required to comply with secrecy laws yet the office of the judicial police is leaking like a sieve. No exactly a level playing field in any language.
Reminds me of the historic sex assault allegations surrounding Cliff Richard which were dropped by the CPS after yet another expensive two year enquiry. As was revealed later, the BBC were tipped off by the police prior to the raid on his Berkshire apartment.
More to the point, were any police officers reprimanded over the incident?
(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2016/10/26/01/2087536A00000578-3873014-image-a-12_1477442486940.jpg)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3873014/Police-gave-BBC-running-commentary-Sir-Cliff-Richard-raid.html
-
I can imagine it is difficult for any suspect/arguido who is required to comply with secrecy laws yet the office of the judicial police is leaking like a sieve. No exactly a level playing field in any language.
Reminds me of the historic sex assault allegations surrounding Cliff Richard which were dropped by the CPS after yet another expensive two year enquiry. As was revealed later, the BBC were tipped off by the police prior to the raid on his Berkshire apartment.
More to the point, were any police officers reprimanded over the incident?
(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2016/10/26/01/2087536A00000578-3873014-image-a-12_1477442486940.jpg)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3873014/Police-gave-BBC-running-commentary-Sir-Cliff-Richard-raid.html
The surprising thing here is , and I freely use ancient scuttlebutt initially, is that despite the system leaking like a sieve and despite the Portuguese wishing to stitch up the McCann's and despite every man jack of the Portuguese Judiciary being as bent as a dockers hook the PP still managed to make the system work as intended in that the inquiry was filed in accordance with the law.
-
The surprising thing here is , and I freely use ancient scuttlebutt initially, is that despite the system leaking like a sieve and despite the Portuguese wishing to stitch up the McCann's and despite every man jack of the Portuguese Judiciary being as bent as a dockers hook the PP still managed to make the system work as intended in that the inquiry was filed in accordance with the law.
I don't think the system did work, Alice. It didn't find Madeleine McCann and in my opinion the way in which the system was used was the main impediment to that.
You posted there are three stages in Portuguese criminal proceedings ...- Inquiry
- Bringing to Justice
- Trial
The first two steps you detailed in the investigation into Madeleine's disappearance began and ended with the parents; with the insidious leaks destroying their credibility starting with JOSE MANUEL OLIVEIRA Crime reporter, 'Diario de Noticias': a badly told story ... PEDRO TADEU, Editor, 24 Horas': displayed a cold and calculating attitude throughout this process ... JOSE BARRA da COSTA, Former Policia Judiciaria: this is a couple who practice 'swinging'
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/panorama/7106086.stm
All of that was being fed into the public domain and consciousness at a time when the victims of it were gagged and unable to refute the lies being spread about them because the secrecy law did not allow them to speak about the investigation.
It was a very close run thing for the McCanns who were no doubt aware of the Cipriano case.
In the event their story did not end as Leonor's did with a 'murderer' safely under lock and key with all three stages in proceedings completed.
Neither did it reach stage three of the process with any suspect going to trial. Whether or not that could be put down entirely to the abuse of the penal laws by the investigation could never be determined ... but I don't think it could have helped.
-
I don't think the system did work, Alice. It didn't find Madeleine McCann and in my opinion the way in which the system was used was the main impediment to that.
You posted there are three stages in Portuguese criminal proceedings ...- Inquiry
- Bringing to Justice
- Trial
The first two steps you detailed in the investigation into Madeleine's disappearance began and ended with the parents; with the insidious leaks destroying their credibility starting with JOSE MANUEL OLIVEIRA Crime reporter, 'Diario de Noticias': a badly told story ... PEDRO TADEU, Editor, 24 Horas': displayed a cold and calculating attitude throughout this process ... JOSE BARRA da COSTA, Former Policia Judiciaria: this is a couple who practice 'swinging'
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/panorama/7106086.stm
All of that was being fed into the public domain and consciousness at a time when the victims of it were gagged and unable to refute the lies being spread about them because the secrecy law did not allow them to speak about the investigation.
It was a very close run thing for the McCanns who were no doubt aware of the Cipriano case.
In the event their story did not end as Leonor's did with a 'murderer' safely under lock and key with all three stages in proceedings completed.
Neither did it reach stage three of the process with any suspect going to trial. Whether or not that could be put down entirely to the abuse of the penal laws by the investigation could never be determined ... but I don't think it could have helped.
Kindly provide a cite for "the McCanns who were no doubt aware of the Cipriano case".
-
Kindly provide a cite for "the McCanns who were no doubt aware of the Cipriano case".
Police officer made arguido in the process of assaults against Leonor Cipriano Expresso
An official of the PJ of Portimao is the seventh police officer to be implicated in the process of alleged assaults on the mother of Joana.
18:00 Friday, May 4, 2007
Gonçalo Amaral, coordinator of the Judicial Police of Portimão, was accused in the case investigating the alleged assaults on Leonor Cipriano, which occurred in October 2004. The woman complained of being beaten, kicked and with a cardboard tube During informal interrogations? Which would have taken place without the presence of the defense lawyer and without the knowledge of the public prosecutor investigating the disappearance of the eight-year-old daughter of Leonor.
Gonçalo Amaral was at that time coordinator of the PJ of Faro
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id176.htm
Of course the McCanns knew about the case of another little girl who apparently vanished off the face of the earth without trace from a town in close proximity to that from which their daughter had disappeared; and the prosecution being taken against the man coordinating Madeleine's case as he had hers.
Just as they would later find out about the torture case against Tavares Almeida who had interrogated Kate McCann.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1565474/Head-of-Madeleine-McCann-inquiry-faces-trial.html
Why do you persist in demanding meaningless cites for throwaway remarks which quite obviously require none ... particularly when it deflects into off topic?
-
Police officer made arguido in the process of assaults against Leonor Cipriano Expresso
An official of the PJ of Portimao is the seventh police officer to be implicated in the process of alleged assaults on the mother of Joana.
18:00 Friday, May 4, 2007
Gonçalo Amaral, coordinator of the Judicial Police of Portimão, was accused in the case investigating the alleged assaults on Leonor Cipriano, which occurred in October 2004. The woman complained of being beaten, kicked and with a cardboard tube During informal interrogations? Which would have taken place without the presence of the defense lawyer and without the knowledge of the public prosecutor investigating the disappearance of the eight-year-old daughter of Leonor.
Gonçalo Amaral was at that time coordinator of the PJ of Faro
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id176.htm
Of course the McCanns knew about the case of another little girl who apparently vanished off the face of the earth without trace from a town in close proximity to that from which their daughter had disappeared; and the prosecution being taken against the man coordinating Madeleine's case as he had hers.
Just as they would later find out about the torture case against Tavares Almeida who had interrogated Kate McCann.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1565474/Head-of-Madeleine-McCann-inquiry-faces-trial.html
Why do you persist in demanding meaningless cites for throwaway remarks which quite obviously require none ... particularly when it deflects into off topic?
I can see nothing in your cite that shows the McCanns knew about the Cipriano case.
Do you have a cite that the McCanns knew about the Cipriano case? A cite or a 'no' would suffice.
-
I can see nothing in your cite that shows the McCanns knew about the Cipriano case.
Do you have a cite that the McCanns knew about the Cipriano case? A cite or a 'no' would suffice.
Kate talks about the Cipriano case and Amarals's conviction in her book. Page 416.
As per Brietta's link - the UK press reported on the allegations being made against Amaral re Leonora Cipriano in Oct 2007. He was made an arguido on 4th May 2007. The idea that such alarming public news would have escaped the attention of the McCanns and/or their family or friends - or was not brought to their attention by others is totally unrealistic IMO.
-
Kindly provide a cite for "the McCanns who were no doubt aware of the Cipriano case".
Well it was in the British newspapers the day after !!
With thanks to Carana and John in the thread: "Leonor Cipriano's ex Leandro Silva claims Joana was abducted or sold."
« on: February 09, 2014, 12:27:44 PM »
Posted on behalf of Carana.
Leonor Cipriano's former partner, Leandro Silva, claims Joana was abducted or sold.
These cops framed my wife.
8 September 2007
The Sun - By OLIVER HARVEY Chief Feature Writer
THE husband of a Portuguese woman jailed for the murder of her child spoke last night of his fears for Kate McCann.
Leandro Silva said his wife had been set up and he believed police would do the same thing to four-year-old Madeleine’s mother.
He said: “I am worried Kate will be framed for a crime she did not commit, the way it happened to my wife.”
Leandro also demanded that one of the detectives leading the Maddie investigation should be dropped from the case.
Detective Goncalo Amaral has been accused of being involved with beating Leandro’s wife, Leonor Cipriano, during her interrogation over the death of her daughter, Joana, nine.
[
Leandro Silva, former partner of Leonor Cipriano.
Speaking exclusively to The Sun, Leandro said: “Goncalo Amaral shouldn’t still be investigating the McCann case.
“I believe he will be proved to be a bad policeman and a bad operator.
“I don’t believe Kate and Gerry have anything to do with Madeleine’s disappearance.
“I just don’t believe they would do such a thing. After losing Joana I know the pain they are going through. It’s terrible.”
In news that shocked the world Kate McCann was yesterday declared an “arguida” ? Portuguese for suspect ? in the hunt for Maddie.
And the story of little Joana Cipriano has some chilling echoes of the British child’s disappearance.
Joana vanished on September 12, 2004, just seven miles from the spot where Madeleine went missing on May 3.
The innocent, brown-eyed youngster, her chestnut hair cut into a boyish crop, set off from home in the village of Figueira to collect groceries.
But she never returned. Like Maddie, it was as if Joana had disappeared off the face of the Earth.
www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/5sep7/SUN_08_09_2007.htm
Of course they knew about the Cipriano case, just 7 miles away in Figuiera, with a little girl lost/ abducted just two years 8 months before before .... and The Sun Article the day after proved this was common knowledge.
What on earth are you thinking about SIL making such an ungrounded suggestion?
Perchance just disrupting Briettas discussion flow, trying to ruin her argument?
-
Can I remind posters not to get personal, or comments in that frame will be deleted.
-
I don't think the system did work, Alice. It didn't find Madeleine McCann and in my opinion the way in which the system was used was the main impediment to that.
You posted there are three stages in Portuguese criminal proceedings ...- Inquiry
- Bringing to Justice
- Trial
The first two steps you detailed in the investigation into Madeleine's disappearance began and ended with the parents; with the insidious leaks destroying their credibility starting with JOSE MANUEL OLIVEIRA Crime reporter, 'Diario de Noticias': a badly told story ... PEDRO TADEU, Editor, 24 Horas': displayed a cold and calculating attitude throughout this process ... JOSE BARRA da COSTA, Former Policia Judiciaria: this is a couple who practice 'swinging'
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/panorama/7106086.stm
All of that was being fed into the public domain and consciousness at a time when the victims of it were gagged and unable to refute the lies being spread about them because the secrecy law did not allow them to speak about the investigation.
It was a very close run thing for the McCanns who were no doubt aware of the Cipriano case.
In the event their story did not end as Leonor's did with a 'murderer' safely under lock and key with all three stages in proceedings completed.
Neither did it reach stage three of the process with any suspect going to trial. Whether or not that could be put down entirely to the abuse of the penal laws by the investigation could never be determined ... but I don't think it could have helped.
Tellme how the system didn't work then.
The PP filed the case when it could not be determined whether or what crime had been committed. That's what the Portuguese law calls for.
Cipriano is irrelevant. She was/is a convicted murderess and for the record all the beating and so on wheresoever it took place would render anything she said under such duress as inadmissible as evidence in a Portuguese court.
Unless of course we are back to the "every man of the Portuguese Judiciary being as bent as a docker's hook". Tell that one to the marines the sailors will not believe it.
-
The Cipriano case always gets dragged out as some sort of vindication that all was not well with the Portuguese justice system. Both Leonor Cipriano and her brother João certainly did have a case to answer, the sickening video made by the PJ showing João Cipriano reenacting the dreadful crime is certainly evidence of that.
We know that Leonor and João saw some rough treatment at the hands of the Portuguese police and that is to be condemned, had the McCanns been Portuguese we might well have seen this repeated. That said however, there is nothing the two cases have in common beyond the fact that two little girls remain missing, one presumed murdered.
-
Kate talks about the Cipriano case and Amarals's conviction in her book. Page 416.
As per Brietta's link - the UK press reported on the allegations being made against Amaral re Leonora Cipriano in Oct 2007. He was made an arguido on 4th May 2007. The idea that such alarming public news would have escaped the attention of the McCanns and/or their family or friends - or was not brought to their attention by others is totally unrealistic IMO.
I've got the hardback version. It stops at 392, and there is no entry for Cipriano in the index. Would you care to quote the relevant passage so we are all enlightened.
-
BUMPED
I don't think the system did work, Alice. It didn't find Madeleine McCann and in my opinion the way in which the system was used was the main impediment to that.
You posted there are three stages in Portuguese criminal proceedings ...- Inquiry
- Bringing to Justice
- Trial
The first two steps you detailed in the investigation into Madeleine's disappearance began and ended with the parents; with the insidious leaks destroying their credibility starting with JOSE MANUEL OLIVEIRA Crime reporter, 'Diario de Noticias': a badly told story ... PEDRO TADEU, Editor, 24 Horas': displayed a cold and calculating attitude throughout this process ... JOSE BARRA da COSTA, Former Policia Judiciaria: this is a couple who practice 'swinging'
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/panorama/7106086.stm
All of that was being fed into the public domain and consciousness at a time when the victims of it were gagged and unable to refute the lies being spread about them because the secrecy law did not allow them to speak about the investigation.
It was a very close run thing for the McCanns who were no doubt aware of the Cipriano case.
In the event their story did not end as Leonor's did with a 'murderer' safely under lock and key with all three stages in proceedings completed.
Neither did it reach stage three of the process with any suspect going to trial. Whether or not that could be put down entirely to the abuse of the penal laws by the investigation could never be determined ... but I don't think it could have helped.[/size]
This Secrecy Law made the Mccanns life Double Hell.
All the lies, insinuations and evil propaganda, ?deliberately put out against them, caused sections of the Public to doubt them ... and eventually an agressive set of erm ... "sceptics" ... to form a hatred group against them. Such destructive behaviour against innocents who were grieving from the loss of their much loved daughter.
In a supposedly civilized society ....
Unbelievable 8(8-))
-
Well it was in the British newspapers the day after !!
With thanks to Carana and John in the thread: "Leonor Cipriano's ex Leandro Silva claims Joana was abducted or sold."
« on: February 09, 2014, 12:27:44 PM »
Posted on behalf of Carana.
Leonor Cipriano's former partner, Leandro Silva, claims Joana was abducted or sold.
These cops framed my wife.
8 September 2007
The Sun - By OLIVER HARVEY Chief Feature Writer
THE husband of a Portuguese woman jailed for the murder of her child spoke last night of his fears for Kate McCann.
Leandro Silva said his wife had been set up and he believed police would do the same thing to four-year-old Madeleine’s mother.
He said: “I am worried Kate will be framed for a crime she did not commit, the way it happened to my wife.”
Leandro also demanded that one of the detectives leading the Maddie investigation should be dropped from the case.
Detective Goncalo Amaral has been accused of being involved with beating Leandro’s wife, Leonor Cipriano, during her interrogation over the death of her daughter, Joana, nine.
[
Leandro Silva, former partner of Leonor Cipriano.
Speaking exclusively to The Sun, Leandro said: “Goncalo Amaral shouldn’t still be investigating the McCann case.
“I believe he will be proved to be a bad policeman and a bad operator.
“I don’t believe Kate and Gerry have anything to do with Madeleine’s disappearance.
“I just don’t believe they would do such a thing. After losing Joana I know the pain they are going through. It’s terrible.”
In news that shocked the world Kate McCann was yesterday declared an “arguida” ? Portuguese for suspect ? in the hunt for Maddie.
And the story of little Joana Cipriano has some chilling echoes of the British child’s disappearance.
Joana vanished on September 12, 2004, just seven miles from the spot where Madeleine went missing on May 3.
The innocent, brown-eyed youngster, her chestnut hair cut into a boyish crop, set off from home in the village of Figueira to collect groceries.
But she never returned. Like Maddie, it was as if Joana had disappeared off the face of the Earth.
www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/5sep7/SUN_08_09_2007.htm
Of course they knew about the Cipriano case, just 7 miles away in Figuiera, with a little girl lost/ abducted just two years 8 months before before .... and The Sun Article the day after proved this was common knowledge.
What on earth are you thinking about SIL making such an ungrounded suggestion?
Perchance just disrupting Briettas discussion flow, trying to ruin her argument?
The McCanns were made arguidos before this date.
I am still awaiting a cite that supports Brietta's assertion. I am not the origin of this assertion - Brietta is. Forum protocol is a cite.
By the way, I have lived here for 5 years, and to find Figueira I would have to use Google. Just like I did when I heard about Portelas.
-
BUMPED
This Secrecy Law made the Mccanns life Double Hell.
All the lies, insinuations and evil propaganda, ?deliberately put out against them, caused sections of the Public to doubt them ... and eventually an agressive set of erm ... "sceptics" ... to form a hatred group against them. Such destructive behaviour against innocents who were grieving from the loss of their much loved daughter.
In a supposedly civilized society ....
Unbelievable 8(8-))
Tell me Sadie, do you hold the Mccanns responsible in any way for leaving their children by themselves ?
-
BUMPED
This Secrecy Law made the Mccanns life Double Hell.
All the lies, insinuations and evil propaganda, ?deliberately put out against them, caused sections of the Public to doubt them ... and eventually an agressive set of erm ... "sceptics" ... to form a hatred group against them. Such destructive behaviour against innocents who were grieving from the loss of their much loved daughter.
In a supposedly civilized society ....
Unbelievable 8(8-))
You have no way of knowing what they are and are not innocent of so merely your opinion. Their conduct towards the Portuguese police tells me a somewhat different story to the one you would have us all digest. There is an untold story still in this case and one which the McCanns are desperate to avoid.
-
I've got the hardback version. It stops at 392, and there is no entry for Cipriano in the index. Would you care to quote the relevant passage so we are all enlightened.
Page 338 in the hardback copy.
IMO British Consul Bill Henderson would have known about Amaral as the murder case of Michael Ahern was ongoing in the Algarve in the weeks prior to Madeleine's disappearance. Henderson was providing consular assistance for a UK citizen David Figueira - a case which involved a body in a freezer, a ballistics expert who couldn't determine if a gun had been fired & an autopsy at odds with the prosecutions version of events (yes, really).
-
Tell me Sadie, do you hold the Mccanns responsible in any way for leaving their children by themselves ?
It is difficult to determine exactly the effect abuse of the secrecy laws may have had on Madeleine's case for the simple reason that not all investigations be they missing children or a jewellery heist, reach successful conclusion.
The least a missing child can expect surely, is to be given the undivided attention of those tasked with finding him or her.
How was the search for Madeleine assisted by dishonest leaks to the press ... for example the alleged finding of a syringe?
Why was it so important to the Policia Judiciaria to blacken the names of the McCanns, in particular Kate?
-
It is difficult to determine exactly the effect abuse of the secrecy laws may have had on Madeleine's case for the simple reason that not all investigations be they missing children or a jewellery heist, reach successful conclusion.
The least a missing child can expect surely, is to be given the undivided attention of those tasked with finding him or her.
How was the search for Madeleine assisted by dishonest leaks to the press ... for example the alleged finding of a syringe?
Why was it so important to the Policia Judiciaria to blacken the names of the McCanns, in particular Kate?
Leaks occurred from both sides Brietta.
As to blackening opinion , the Mccanns in my view and others did that all by their actions.
-
I've got the hardback version. It stops at 392, and there is no entry for Cipriano in the index. Would you care to quote the relevant passage so we are all enlightened.
This is the only reference in the book to the Ciprianos. Digital version page 354.
Later the same month, Amaral was given an eighteen-month suspended prison sentence in connection with a case in which three of his officers were accused of torture. The mother and uncle of another missing child – eight-year-old Joana Cipriano, who had disappeared in 2004 from a village seven miles from Praia da Luz – had been imprisoned for her murder, although no body has ever been found. They claimed they had been tortured into confessing (the police maintained that Sra Cipriano had fallen down the stairs).
-
BUMPED
This Secrecy Law made the Mccanns life Double Hell.
All the lies, insinuations and evil propaganda, ?deliberately put out against them, caused sections of the Public to doubt them ... and eventually an agressive set of erm ... "sceptics" ... to form a hatred group against them. Such destructive behaviour against innocents who were grieving from the loss of their much loved daughter.
In a supposedly civilized society ....
Unbelievable 8(8-))
IMO it also served as an advantage to them.
-
Leaks occurred from both sides Brietta.
As to blackening opinion , the Mccanns in my view and others did that all by their actions.
This thread exists precisely because Madeleine's parents and their friends observed the secrecy laws so stringently that it was thought they had something to hide.
In the interim the Portuguese press was full of lies and innuendo concerning them.
-
This thread exists precisely because Madeleine's parents and their friends observed the secrecy laws so stringently that it was thought they had something to hide.
In the interim the Portuguese press was full of lies and innuendo concerning them.
Yet there were statements coming from 'sources close to the Mccanns' all the way through these 10 years.
It was never a one sided issue Brietta.
-
Page 338 in the hardback copy.
IMO British Consul Bill Henderson would have known about Amaral as the murder case of Michael Ahern was ongoing in the Algarve in the weeks prior to Madeleine's disappearance. Henderson was providing consular assistance for a UK citizen David Figueira - a case which involved a body in a freezer, a ballistics expert who couldn't determine if a gun had been fired & an autopsy at odds with the prosecutions version of events (yes, really).
Thank you.
p338 of 'madeleine'.
"Later the same month {May 2009}, Amaral was given an eighteen-month suspended prison sentence in connection with a case in which three of his officers were accused of torture. The mother and uncle of another missing child - eight-year old Joana Cipriano, who had disappeared in 2004 from a village from Praia da Luz - had been imprisoned for her murder, although no body has ever been found. They claimed they had been tortured into confessing (the police maintained that Sra Cipriano had fallen down the stairs). The officers concerned were cleared but the jury found that Amaral had falsified statements relating to the torture case. His conviction was upheld in the Supreme Court in March 2011. Joanna's mother is still in jail."
I am not going to get into a debate about the Joana Cipriano case, since there is a perfectly good sub-forum dedicated to that.
"It was a very close run thing for the McCanns who were no doubt aware of the Cipriano case." was Brietta's assertion.
Thus far, I have seen nothing that evidences this. They might or might not have been aware of it. Bill Henderson might or might not have informed them of it. They might or might not have heard of the Cipriano case from relatives/supporters in the UK.
I am not familiar the contents of Gerry's blog. Is there a reference to Joana Cipriano in that?
-
Thank you.
p338 of 'madeleine'.
"Later the same month {May 2009}, Amaral was given an eighteen-month suspended prison sentence in connection with a case in which three of his officers were accused of torture. The mother and uncle of another missing child - eight-year old Joana Cipriano, who had disappeared in 2004 from a village from Praia da Luz - had been imprisoned for her murder, although no body has ever been found. They claimed they had been tortured into confessing (the police maintained that Sra Cipriano had fallen down the stairs). The officers concerned were cleared but the jury found that Amaral had falsified statements relating to the torture case. His conviction was upheld in the Supreme Court in March 2011. Joanna's mother is still in jail."
I am not going to get into a debate about the Joana Cipriano case, since there is a perfectly good sub-forum dedicated to that.
"It was a very close run thing for the McCanns who were no doubt aware of the Cipriano case." was Brietta's assertion.
Thus far, I have seen nothing that evidences this. They might or might not have been aware of it. Bill Henderson might or might not have informed them of it. They might or might not have heard of the Cipriano case from relatives/supporters in the UK.
I am not familiar the contents of Gerry's blog. Is there a reference to Joana Cipriano in that?
It was Bill Henderson who told the McCanns shortly after Madeleine's disappearance about the spate of crimes against British children in the Algarve. Do you really think he was ignorant of the Cipriano case & the local PJ's role in that, along with the Intermezzo case which was also a very high profile case at the time & involved Amaral & Almeida?
-
Thank you.
p338 of 'madeleine'.
"Later the same month {May 2009}, Amaral was given an eighteen-month suspended prison sentence in connection with a case in which three of his officers were accused of torture. The mother and uncle of another missing child - eight-year old Joana Cipriano, who had disappeared in 2004 from a village from Praia da Luz - had been imprisoned for her murder, although no body has ever been found. They claimed they had been tortured into confessing (the police maintained that Sra Cipriano had fallen down the stairs). The officers concerned were cleared but the jury found that Amaral had falsified statements relating to the torture case. His conviction was upheld in the Supreme Court in March 2011. Joanna's mother is still in jail."
I am not going to get into a debate about the Joana Cipriano case, since there is a perfectly good sub-forum dedicated to that.
"It was a very close run thing for the McCanns who were no doubt aware of the Cipriano case." was Brietta's assertion.
Thus far, I have seen nothing that evidences this. They might or might not have been aware of it. Bill Henderson might or might not have informed them of it. They might or might not have heard of the Cipriano case from relatives/supporters in the UK.
I am not familiar the contents of Gerry's blog. Is there a reference to Joana Cipriano in that?
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8392.msg418607#msg418607 where it says ...
Police officer made arguido in the process of assaults against Leonor Cipriano Expresso
An official of the PJ of Portimao is the seventh police officer to be implicated in the process of alleged assaults on the mother of Joana.
18:00 Friday, May 4, 2007
Gonçalo Amaral, coordinator of the Judicial Police of Portimão, was accused in the case investigating the alleged assaults on Leonor Cipriano, which occurred in October 2004. The woman complained of being beaten, kicked and with a cardboard tube During informal interrogations? Which would have taken place without the presence of the defense lawyer and without the knowledge of the public prosecutor investigating the disappearance of the eight-year-old daughter of Leonor.
Gonçalo Amaral was at that time coordinator of the PJ of Faro
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id176.htm
-
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8392.msg418607#msg418607 where it says ...
Police officer made arguido in the process of assaults against Leonor Cipriano Expresso
An official of the PJ of Portimao is the seventh police officer to be implicated in the process of alleged assaults on the mother of Joana.
18:00 Friday, May 4, 2007
Gonçalo Amaral, coordinator of the Judicial Police of Portimão, was accused in the case investigating the alleged assaults on Leonor Cipriano, which occurred in October 2004. The woman complained of being beaten, kicked and with a cardboard tube During informal interrogations? Which would have taken place without the presence of the defense lawyer and without the knowledge of the public prosecutor investigating the disappearance of the eight-year-old daughter of Leonor.
Gonçalo Amaral was at that time coordinator of the PJ of Faro
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id176.htm
Its quite a coincidence that Gonçalo Amaral was made an arguido in the Cipriano case the very day he was assigned the position of coordinator in the McCann case.
-
The McCanns were made arguidos before this date.
I am still awaiting a cite that supports Brietta's assertion. I am not the origin of this assertion - Brietta is. Forum protocol is a cite.
By the way, I have lived here for 5 years, and to find Figueira I would have to use Google. Just like I did when I heard about Portelas.
The article in the SUN was dated the 8th Sept and the Mccanns were made arguidos on the 7th Sept.
Are you saying that the SUN managed to find Leandro, interview him, and then write the piece and publish in less thann 12 hours?
I think The Mccanns knew about what had happened to Leonor in advance of being made arquidos.
SIL, why are you lowering yourself to the cheap tactics of insinuating (for any reader who didn't have the means to check) that probably The Mccanns didn't know about what happened in the Cipriano case? You must surely have checked the dates and realised the timings ruled in the fact that The Mccanns would know.
-
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8392.msg418607#msg418607 where it says ...
Police officer made arguido in the process of assaults against Leonor Cipriano Expresso
An official of the PJ of Portimao is the seventh police officer to be implicated in the process of alleged assaults on the mother of Joana.
18:00 Friday, May 4, 2007
Gonçalo Amaral, coordinator of the Judicial Police of Portimão, was accused in the case investigating the alleged assaults on Leonor Cipriano, which occurred in October 2004. The woman complained of being beaten, kicked and with a cardboard tube During informal interrogations? Which would have taken place without the presence of the defense lawyer and without the knowledge of the public prosecutor investigating the disappearance of the eight-year-old daughter of Leonor.
Gonçalo Amaral was at that time coordinator of the PJ of Faro
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id176.htm
Why do you keep referring me to large slabs of material that appear, to me, to prove nothing relevant?
If you have evidence that the McCanns knew about the Cipriano case, then cite it.
The date when Amaral was made an arguido has no relevance to the issue of whether the McCanns did or did not know about Joana's case.
I take it that since thus far you have not provided a cite for your assertion, you cannot. Until you do, it is an IYO.
-
It was Bill Henderson who told the McCanns shortly after Madeleine's disappearance about the spate of crimes against British children in the Algarve. Do you really think he was ignorant of the Cipriano case & the local PJ's role in that, along with the Intermezzo case which was also a very high profile case at the time & involved Amaral & Almeida?
Please provide a cite.
-
Please provide a cite.
Here's one.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/8500353/Kate-McCann-accuses-Algarve-police-of-sex-abuse-cover-up.html
-
Why do you keep referring me to large slabs of material that appear, to me, to prove nothing relevant?
If you have evidence that the McCanns knew about the Cipriano case, then cite it.
The date when Amaral was made an arguido has no relevance to the issue of whether the McCanns did or did not know about Joana's case.
I take it that since thus far you have not provided a cite for your assertion, you cannot. Until you do, it is an IYO.
Encarnacao, who was Amaral's superior in the Madeleine case, also oversaw the Joana case. He worked closely with UK police officers from the get-go. Do you think he would have withheld details of another unsolved case from a few years before?
-
It was Bill Henderson who told the McCanns shortly after Madeleine's disappearance about the spate of crimes against British children in the Algarve. Do you really think he was ignorant of the Cipriano case & the local PJ's role in that, along with the Intermezzo case which was also a very high profile case at the time & involved Amaral & Almeida?
I have very little information on the content of discussions between Henderson and the McCanns, despite his name getting several mentions in 'madeleine'.
The key references appear to be p89-90 and 323. 323 implies Kate has access to parts of the PJ Files that were ordered to not be released. Hmm.
There is no reference to Henderson discussing Amaral or Cipriano.
Perhaps Henderson gave her a heads-up on Amaral, and she is merely being diplomatic. But the truth is, I cannot see anything consistent with that. Kate portrays the McCanns (largely) as co-operating with the PJ until Kate was made an arguida, not as some cloak-and-dagger conflict with 'the alleged evildoer Amaral'.
-
Here's one.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/8500353/Kate-McCann-accuses-Algarve-police-of-sex-abuse-cover-up.html
Date for that article is 2011
-
Why do you keep referring me to large slabs of material that appear, to me, to prove nothing relevant?
If you have evidence that the McCanns knew about the Cipriano case, then cite it.
The date when Amaral was made an arguido has no relevance to the issue of whether the McCanns did or did not know about Joana's case.
I take it that since thus far you have not provided a cite for your assertion, you cannot. Until you do, it is an IYO.
Actually ... it was in response to your request regarding Gerry McCann's blog and whether or not Joana Cipriano is mentioned there.
Please refrain from demanding cites if none given by me appear destined ever to meet with your approval. Thank you.
-
Date for that article is 2011
He must have had a time machine then ... the article states ...
He told the McCanns shortly after the abduction that there had been "several cases of men getting into bed with children". When police made public their files on the case in the summer of 2008, Mrs McCann discovered five cases of British children being sexually abused in their beds while on holiday and while their parents slept in another room.
-
In the past 5 years I have only been in the Algarve for less than a fortnight total but I have been there twice!
BTW, the little brown camper van that was noticed in Figueira before Joana vanished, also vanished and was found dumped in Praia de Luz.
Of course everyone was aware of what happened in the Joana Cipriano case .... and how her mother was tortured to near blindness.
Nope to part I have bolded. I had never heard of it until posters repeatedly dragged it onto this forum rather than the JC forum.
And believe it or not, not everyone has heard of the Madeleine McCann case.
We have holidayed in Portugal many a time, both before and after Madeleine's disappearance, but until we actually moved here, I could not have told you where Luz (Lagos) or Luz (Tavira) are. And since I have no interest in the Cipriano case, I don't know where Figueira is.
-
He must have had a time machine then ... the article states ...
He told the McCanns shortly after the abduction that there had been "several cases of men getting into bed with children". When police made public their files on the case in the summer of 2008, Mrs McCann discovered five cases of British children being sexually abused in their beds while on holiday and while their parents slept in another room.
Irrespective of what you say, the date of the article state 2011.
-
Irrespective of what you say, the date of the article state 2011.
Quite ... it refers to events she was informed about in 2007 to which, under secrecy of justice law Kate could not make reference.
-
The article in the SUN was dated the 8th Sept and the Mccanns were made arguidos on the 7th Sept.
Are you saying that the SUN managed to find Leandro, interview him, and then write the piece and publish in less thann 12 hours?
I think The Mccanns knew about what had happened to Leonor in advance of being made arquidos.
SIL, why are you lowering yourself to the cheap tactics of insinuating (for any reader who didn't have the means to check) that probably The Mccanns didn't know about what happened in the Cipriano case? You must surely have checked the dates and realised the timings ruled in the fact that The Mccanns would know.
Please refrain from using phrases like 'lowering yourself' and 'cheap tactics of insinuating'. 8((()*/
I have no way of knowing for certain whether, at the time Kate was made an arguida, she knew or did not know about the Cipriano case.
On balance of evidence, probably not. She did not write of being thus informed at the time, or who allegedly informed her.
If I get something better than might, ought, could, should, obviously, and similar flannelling I'll be happy to accept. Until then, it remains speculation.
-
Article 86 of the Portuguese Criminal Procedure Code states that all parties to the investigation are bound by a duty of secrecy. This duty of secrecy applies to all those connected to the investigation and to all those who have obtained knowledge of the investigation from the commencement of the investigation to the moment that the proceedings become public.Traditionally, the rule of Secrecy of Justice aims to guarantee the effectiveness of a criminal inquiry and a fair investigation and trial.More recently, this rule has been defended on the basis of the rights to privacy, to a good name and reputation of victims, defendants or other parties involved in criminal proceedings, and also on the basis of the presumption of innocence.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=5795.0
According to the above the McCann's rights to the protection afforded under the Portuguese constitution and therefore by law were being trampled upon each and every time 'a source close to the investigation' deigned to leak information to the Portuguese press.
Why was that allowed?
-
Leaks are not 'allowed', they just happen. Ask the British government ?{)(**
-
Encarnacao, who was Amaral's superior in the Madeleine case, also oversaw the Joana case. He worked closely with UK police officers from the get-go. Do you think he would have withheld details of another unsolved case from a few years before?
Withheld them from whom?
From the Leicestershire Police? Who knows? On balance, probably.
From the McCanns? Definitely.
What would you expect him to say to the McCanns? 'We had another case like this 2 years ago quite close by. Don't worry, the mother is in prison, after confessing'.
Please, why on Earth would Encarnação discuss this with either the LP or the McCanns?
-
Actually ... it was in response to your request regarding Gerry McCann's blog and whether or not Joana Cipriano is mentioned there.
Please refrain from demanding cites if none given by me appear destined ever to meet with your approval. Thank you.
Let me see.
No cite that the McCanns knew of the Cipriano case, when made arguidos.
No cite that Gerry McCann wrote of the Cipriano case in his blog.
Perhaps you would be good enough in future to make clear when you are merely stating your opinion, as per forum protocols. Much faster that way.
TY 8((()*/
-
Withheld them from whom?
From the Leicestershire Police? Who knows? On balance, probably.
From the McCanns? Definitely.
What would you expect him to say to the McCanns? 'We had another case like this 2 years ago quite close by. Don't worry, the mother is in prison, after confessing'.
Please, why on Earth would Encarnação discuss this with either the LP or the McCanns?
It was all over the UK press by early June 2007.
http://newsoutlines.blogspot.co.uk/2010/01/media-treatment-of-portuguese-police.html
-
Article 86 of the Portuguese Criminal Procedure Code states that all parties to the investigation are bound by a duty of secrecy. This duty of secrecy applies to all those connected to the investigation and to all those who have obtained knowledge of the investigation from the commencement of the investigation to the moment that the proceedings become public.Traditionally, the rule of Secrecy of Justice aims to guarantee the effectiveness of a criminal inquiry and a fair investigation and trial.More recently, this rule has been defended on the basis of the rights to privacy, to a good name and reputation of victims, defendants or other parties involved in criminal proceedings, and also on the basis of the presumption of innocence.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=5795.0
According to the above the McCann's rights to the protection afforded under the Portuguese constitution and therefore by law were being trampled upon each and every time 'a source close to the investigation' deigned to leak information to the Portuguese press.
Why was that allowed?
Later on the same article it sayeth:
"The PJ, with authorisation of the Criminal Investigation Judge (JIC), can provide information to the media. In addition, provision is made in Article 86 of the Portuguese Criminal Procedure Code for the PJ to provide the press with summary reports regarding the ongoing investigation specifically in order to prevent crime.ProtectiveAlso, it is not unusual for the PJ to ask for information through the media in particular cases. However, each police investigation is unique and requires more or less secrecy to gather evidence and make arrests. This does no mean that the PJ is failing to release information to the public for the sake of it - it only means that some information must be gathered more discreetly than other information.Care must be taken that information which is released would not, for example, compromise an investigation by alerting perpetrators of the PJ’s intentions or potential course of action".
-
Later on the same article it sayeth:
"The PJ, with authorisation of the Criminal Investigation Judge (JIC), can provide information to the media. In addition, provision is made in Article 86 of the Portuguese Criminal Procedure Code for the PJ to provide the press with summary reports regarding the ongoing investigation specifically in order to prevent crime.ProtectiveAlso, it is not unusual for the PJ to ask for information through the media in particular cases. However, each police investigation is unique and requires more or less secrecy to gather evidence and make arrests. This does no mean that the PJ is failing to release information to the public for the sake of it - it only means that some information must be gathered more discreetly than other information.Care must be taken that information which is released would not, for example, compromise an investigation by alerting perpetrators of the PJ’s intentions or potential course of action".
There's a mission for posters. Find a PJ leak to the press in this case which prevented crime, requested information or didn't alert a potential perp to the direction the PJ were heading?
-
Later on the same article it sayeth:
"The PJ, with authorisation of the Criminal Investigation Judge (JIC), can provide information to the media. In addition, provision is made in Article 86 of the Portuguese Criminal Procedure Code for the PJ to provide the press with summary reports regarding the ongoing investigation specifically in order to prevent crime.ProtectiveAlso, it is not unusual for the PJ to ask for information through the media in particular cases. However, each police investigation is unique and requires more or less secrecy to gather evidence and make arrests. This does no mean that the PJ is failing to release information to the public for the sake of it - it only means that some information must be gathered more discreetly than other information.Care must be taken that information which is released would not, for example, compromise an investigation by alerting perpetrators of the PJ’s intentions or potential course of action".
Verily this was done when Amaral requested permission to release Madeleine's photograph into the public domain.
If police leaking lies to the press about individuals involved in an investigation doesn't break Portuguese law and drive a coach and horses through the rights of those traduced, what does it do?
Did such conduct improve Madeleine's chance of being found?
-
Verily this was done when Amaral requested permission to release Madeleine's photograph into the public domain.
If police leaking lies to the press about individuals involved in an investigation doesn't break Portuguese law and drive a coach and horses through the rights of those traduced, what does it do?
Did such conduct improve Madeleine's chance of being found?
I don't suppose the media gave that a second's thought.
-
I don't suppose the media gave that a second's thought.
The media did their job and in the absence of legitimate information emanating from the investigation relied on that attributed in many instances to 'a source ... ' Nor were they ever asked to show restraint by anyone in authority in Portugal ... unless you can indicate the contrary.
On the other hand if someone within the investigation was leaking selective and pejorative information he or she was not doing their job; they were acting in blatant defiance of the law they were supposed to be upholding and protecting.
-
Posters are reminded not to post libellous content and not to post opinion as fact.
It will be removed.
-
@misty & @ brietta,
Sorry old sticks not into playing silly beggars.
I am looking for a response to the fact that judicial secrecy is not a blanket matter but basically at the discretion of the investigating judge.
So how did this materially disadvantage the McCanns or the investigation into MBM's disappearance?
-
@misty & @ brietta,
Sorry old sticks not into playing silly beggars.
I am looking for a response to the fact that judicial secrecy is not a blanket matter but basically at the discretion of the investigating judge.
So how did this materially disadvantage the McCanns or the investigation into MBM's disappearance?
The role of the PJ was to investigate, not insinuate. What possible advantage was granted to Madeleine as a result of stories about recovered syringes, overdoses, swinging & cremations?
-
The role of the PJ was to investigate, not insinuate. What possible advantage was granted to Madeleine as a result of stories about recovered syringes, overdoses, swinging & cremations?
The role of the PJ was to investigate, not insinuate. I like that phrase misty.
The advantage was only to Amaral and a potential prosecution.
Blacken the suspects name and then it is easier to make accusations stick cos 'Joe Public' believes the salacious gossip and gets angry with the accused, disbelieving what they say.
It is commonly called disinformation and is a technique used for propaganda purposes.
There was certainly no advantage to help finding Madeleine ... nor was there any advantage to her family and friends. Just the opposite in fact.
AIMHO
-
Posters are again reminded, not to post libel, or state opinions as fact.
Please abide by forum rules.
-
The role of the PJ was to investigate, not insinuate. What possible advantage was granted to Madeleine as a result of stories about recovered syringes, overdoses, swinging & cremations?
So how did that put the McCanns at a disadvantage?
It is a simple enough question.
-
So how did that put the McCanns at a disadvantage?
It is a simple enough question.
If you cannot see how it disadvantaged both Madeleine & the McCann family then there is no hope for you. IMO.
-
I was thinking about the 'leaks' attributed to the PJ. Perhaps they are on a par with all the reports in the UK from 'a source close to the investigation'? As Rowley said;
Q: There was a report recently that there was an international manhunt in regards to a person you
were interested in talking to, maybe not even a suspect, maybe a witness?
MR: There are odd headlines and odd stories in newspapers on a regular basis and most of those are
nonsense.
An insider said: “There is just one person who detectives want to speak to who was near to the area where Madeleine disappeared almost 10 years ago.
“An international search has been underway to find them.”
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/778047/madeleine-mccann-police-investigation-new-lead-one-man-key
-
Your defence of a justice system which not only allows but encourages torture as a means of serving justice is also pretty nauseous. Are elements of the Portuguese police as prejudiced against suspected child killers as they are against black people? You really believe that the accused officers didn't use threatening behaviour or violence to obtain the result THEY wanted, not the truth?
Here is some more background to the latest case involving the police at Cova da Moura.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-32419952
...
The restaurants serve cachupa, a slow-cooked stew of corn, beans and meat which is the national dish of Cape Verde. The streets resonate to the sounds of music from Angola.
...
But Portugal's High Commissioner for Migration, Pedro Calado disagrees. "We don't have this big problem of racism in our society," he says.
Calado - the head of the government body tasked with promoting integration, and dealing with racial discrimination - points to the Migrant Integration Policy Index (MIPEX). This global study ranks countries according to how successfully they integrate migrants. Portugal currently comes second, behind Sweden.
Portugal's defenders also point out that it hasn't had riots like London or Paris, and that there's little anti-immigrant political rhetoric in Portugal.
"I have this clear perception that what happened in Cova da Moura is not the general situation of the country. This was an exception," says Calado.
...
Many thanks for these two snippets of information. 8((()*/
-
As a reminder to all posters
No goading.
No libelous comment.
No posting opinion as fact.
-
If you cannot see how it disadvantaged both Madeleine & the McCann family then there is no hope for you. IMO.
Quite likely but you have still ducked the question.
How were the McCanns disadvantaged?
-
Quite likely but you have still ducked the question.
How were the McCanns disadvantaged?
They were disadvantaged because media reports, such as the following, actually formed part of the official PJ files - and in the world of the Portuguese courts that makes the contents facts.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P10/10VOLUME_Xa_Page_2585.jpg
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P10/10VOLUME_Xa_Page_2586.jpg
-
As a reminder.
The McCann's have not been ill-treated and certainly not physically abused.
One has to wonder why some still tread this line, trying to imply they were in danger, when they clearly weren't.
-
As a reminder.
The McCann's have not been ill-treated and certainly not physically abused.
One has to wonder why some still tread this line, trying to imply they were in danger, when they clearly weren't.
They clearly weren't for obvious reasons.
-
As a reminder.
The McCann's have not been ill-treated and certainly not physically abused.
One has to wonder why some still tread this line, trying to imply they were in danger, when they clearly weren't.
I beg to differ.
In my book they were horrendously abused mentally altho not physically.
And of course they were in danger. In danger of being falsely accused and charged for a crime that they didn't commit IMO
As Eleanor points out, I think, but without saying the words, they were protected from false charges and physical abuse by their position in life and even more by the interest of the world watching what went on.
-
The McCann's were not charged and are not under investigation.
They were not in danger.
Madeleine and her siblings were.
-
The McCann's were not charged and are not under investigation.
They were not in danger.
Madeleine and her siblings were.
Danger of what? Not in danger of what?
-
They were disadvantaged because media reports, such as the following, actually formed part of the official PJ files - and in the world of the Portuguese courts that makes the contents facts.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P10/10VOLUME_Xa_Page_2585.jpg
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P10/10VOLUME_Xa_Page_2586.jpg
Being an older geezer who grew upwith slide rules and Telex where we were charged by the letter transmitted..................blx
-
Being an older geezer who grew upwith slide rules and Telex where we were charged by the letter transmitted..................blx
Being an older woman, who grew up with slide rules and Telex .... I say blx to your remark.
The disinformation promoted in both those webpages would be most damaging. Well done misty for finding them
-
They were disadvantaged because media reports, such as the following, actually formed part of the official PJ files - and in the world of the Portuguese courts that makes the contents facts.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P10/10VOLUME_Xa_Page_2585.jpg
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P10/10VOLUME_Xa_Page_2586.jpg
The newspaper stories were published, that's the fact, not necessarily the content of the stories.
-
The newspaper stories were published, that's the fact, not necessarily the content of the stories.
It's the expectation that the investigation wouldn't keep copies of news reporting of the case that is a little odd.
-
It's the expectation that the investigation wouldn't keep copies of news reporting of the case that is a little odd.
It's the context. One of the stories is about the 'pact of silence'. According to Sol they contacted Russell O'Brien who said;
“I have nothing further to tell you. I am not going to dishonour the compromise I assumed with Kate and Gerry. They want to control all information that is disclosed”.
https://joana-morais.blogspot.co.uk/2008/03/madeleine-case-pact-of-silence.html?m=0
-
The newspaper stories were published, that's the fact, not necessarily the content of the stories.
The contents of the stories are part of the investigative evidence otherwise they wouldn't be in the files.
-
It's the context. One of the stories is about the 'pact of silence'. According to Sol they contacted Russell O'Brien who said;
“I have nothing further to tell you. I am not going to dishonour the compromise I assumed with Kate and Gerry. They want to control all information that is disclosed”.
https://joana-morais.blogspot.co.uk/2008/03/madeleine-case-pact-of-silence.html?m=0
I am having difficulty in believing that any educated, or even uneducated, Brit would use that sentence. It is such unatural speech that I cant help wondering if it is made up.
Was the article written from an unbiased stance, do you think? Is it bona fide?
-
It's the context. One of the stories is about the 'pact of silence'. According to Sol they contacted Russell O'Brien who said;
“I have nothing further to tell you. I am not going to dishonour the compromise I assumed with Kate and Gerry. They want to control all information that is disclosed”.
https://joana-morais.blogspot.co.uk/2008/03/madeleine-case-pact-of-silence.html?m=0
That's a strange one.
According to SOL the informant was David Payne.
Madeleine Case - A Pact of Silence SOL
By Felicia Cabrita and Margarida Davim
30 June 2007
Snip
Contrarily to the GNR elements and the Ocean Club's staff, who participated in the searches on the night before and assure they did not see Murat around, Gerry and some of his friends guarantee that he was there. And thus he becomes an arguido.
Gerry and Kate's friends, who are interrogated tightly by the PJ over almost a month, refuse to clarify this contradiction, when asked by Sol. "We have a pact. This is our matter only. It is nobody else's business", says David Payne, another element with the group.
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id117.htm
It is probably worth taking note that the article is dated 30th June 2007; which was at the height of the campaign to discredit all and sundry with even the slightest connection to Kate and Gerry McCann and Madeleine's case.
It is at a time shortly after Madeleine's disappearance and covered by Judicial Secrecy Law which did not appear to restrict Portuguese papers in what lies they chose to print. It did restrict rebuttal or response from those who had been assured breaking the law would result in severe penalty.
-
Only relevant comments on this thread please.
All post relating to the Cipriano case have been moved here. (http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8393.msg418634#msg418634)
-
Only relevant comments on this thread please.
All post relating to the Cipriano case have been moved here. (http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8393.msg418634#msg418634)
Five'll get you ten it morph's into another friggin' dog thread @)(++(*
-
Five'll get you ten it morph's into another friggin' dog thread @)(++(*
Oh, the irony.
-
I am having difficulty in believing that any educated, or even uneducated, Brit would use that sentence. It is such unatural speech that I cant help wondering if it is made up.
Was the article written from an unbiased stance, do you think? Is it bona fide?
Twice translated, but quite clear. Gerry and Kate wished to control what was said.
-
Twice translated, but quite clear. Gerry and Kate wished to control what was said.
There seems to be a bit of an obsession when it comes to issues of "control" usually without benefit of a primary source.
A classic example perhaps being Clarence Mitchell and "Monitor" in English which translates to "controlar" in Portuguese ... it is has come up for discussion on the forum on many occasions.
One can of course make a fairly accurate guess why none of the so called tapas seven would give the time of day to the Portuguese press.
Paramount being they did not wish to break Portuguese law and risk spending time in a Portuguese jail.
Followed closely by the knowledge of the vile lies printed against them and their innocent friends who had lost their daughter in the weeks prior to the alleged claim hitting the newsstands ... not to mention the fevered keyboards of bloggers on a mission.
Did Gerry say it ... I think not.
Did Russell say it ... I think not.
Did David say it ... I think not.
Does it matter one whit outwith the realms of the fantasy of the internet if anyone said it ... I think not.
The fact remains the aforementioned had all been misrepresented and viciously accused of the most horrendous crimes by entities which seemed to be above the secrecy law ... and which they had been assured they were not.
It is rather touching the way in which the Portuguese tabloid, "SOL" is viewed by some Brits ... do you know if the British tabloid, "SUN" is afforded the same respect in Portugal?
-
There seems to be a bit of an obsession when it comes to issues of "control" usually without benefit of a primary source.
A classic example perhaps being Clarence Mitchell and "Monitor" in English which translates to "controlar" in Portuguese ... it is has come up for discussion on the forum on many occasions.
One can of course make a fairly accurate guess why none of the so called tapas seven would give the time of day to the Portuguese press.
Paramount being they did not wish to break Portuguese law and risk spending time in a Portuguese jail.
Followed closely by the knowledge of the vile lies printed against them and their innocent friends who had lost their daughter in the weeks prior to the alleged claim hitting the newsstands ... not to mention the fevered keyboards of bloggers on a mission.
Did Gerry say it ... I think not.
Did Russell say it ... I think not.
Did David say it ... I think not.
Does it matter one whit outwith the realms of the fantasy of the internet if anyone said it ... I think not.
The fact remains the aforementioned had all been misrepresented and viciously accused of the most horrendous crimes by entities which seemed to be above the secrecy law ... and which they had been assured they were not.
It is rather touching the way in which the Portuguese tabloid, "SOL" is viewed by some Brits ... do you know if the British tabloid, "SUN" is afforded the same respect in Portugal?
Why are you so upset at the idea that the McCanns wanted to be in control of what was said to the press? It makes sense to me.
-
Why are you so upset at the idea that the McCanns wanted to be in control of what was said to the press? It makes sense to me.
Doesn't bother me one way or t'other ... but it certainly does seem to have served over the years as a convenient hook for some on which to hang their obsessive dislike of the McCann family ... if the internet is anything to go by.
It really is so simple ... the reason for reluctance to speak to the press was as a result of fear of the repercussions to which they would have subjected themselves to had they fallen foul of the law.
Snip
Rachael Oldfield, one of the so-called Tapas Seven, accused detectives of "outrageous" leaking of case information to the media.
She said officers were guilty of "double standards" for insisting the group obey strict secrecy laws.
She told the BBC: "They leaked information and these rumours that have flown around for the past year - it is outrageous. We have all felt very angry about it.
Guardian Today: the headlines, the analysis, the debate - sent direct to you
Read more
"We were asked to comply with the Portuguese judicial secrecy laws [under] which we were made to understand that we could face two years in prison for speaking out.
"So, as a group, we have not said anything from day one. There have been all these rumours flying around and leaks from sources close to the PJ [Policia Judiciaria], which we haven't been able to refute.
"We would have loved to have spoken out really and just put the record straight, but believed that the investigation would be the best way of finding Madeleine if we cooperated with the police and complied by their rules and regulations."
Oldfield made her comments in the documentary Searching for Madeleine, which will be broadcast tonight on Radio 4.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2008/apr/24/madeleinemccann
They kept their mouths shut in defence of their own reputations which were being deliberately dragged through the mud to protect the integrity of the police investigation into the disappearance of a much loved and missing child.
How sad is it that the police did not demonstrate the same devotion to their duty of finding Madeleine McCann and upholding the law.
-
Doesn't bother me one way or t'other ... but it certainly does seem to have served over the years as a convenient hook for some on which to hang their obsessive dislike of the McCann family ... if the internet is anything to go by.
It really is so simple ... the reason for reluctance to speak to the press was as a result of fear of the repercussions to which they would have subjected themselves to had they fallen foul of the law.
Snip
Rachael Oldfield, one of the so-called Tapas Seven, accused detectives of "outrageous" leaking of case information to the media.
She said officers were guilty of "double standards" for insisting the group obey strict secrecy laws.
She told the BBC: "They leaked information and these rumours that have flown around for the past year - it is outrageous. We have all felt very angry about it.
Guardian Today: the headlines, the analysis, the debate - sent direct to you
Read more
"We were asked to comply with the Portuguese judicial secrecy laws [under] which we were made to understand that we could face two years in prison for speaking out.
"So, as a group, we have not said anything from day one. There have been all these rumours flying around and leaks from sources close to the PJ [Policia Judiciaria], which we haven't been able to refute.
"We would have loved to have spoken out really and just put the record straight, but believed that the investigation would be the best way of finding Madeleine if we cooperated with the police and complied by their rules and regulations."
Oldfield made her comments in the documentary Searching for Madeleine, which will be broadcast tonight on Radio 4.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2008/apr/24/madeleinemccann
They kept their mouths shut in defence of their own reputations which were being deliberately dragged through the mud to protect the integrity of the police investigation into the disappearance of a much loved and missing child.
How sad is it that the police did not demonstrate the same devotion to their duty of finding Madeleine McCann and upholding the law.
According to Sol in June 2007 they spoke to Russell O'Brien on the phone and he said;
“I have nothing further to tell you. I am not going to dishonour the compromise I assumed with Kate and Gerry. They want to control all information that is disclosed”.
https://joana-morais.blogspot.co.uk/2008/03/madeleine-case-pact-of-silence.html?m=0
An official denial was issued via Clarence Mitchell in October 2007 for some reason.
It is rumoured that the PJ leaked, but as we have seen with the UK media and Operation Grange, that doesn't mean they actually did say anything.
-
According to Sol in June 2007 they spoke to Russell O'Brien on the phone and he said;
“I have nothing further to tell you. I am not going to dishonour the compromise I assumed with Kate and Gerry. They want to control all information that is disclosed”.
https://joana-morais.blogspot.co.uk/2008/03/madeleine-case-pact-of-silence.html?m=0
An official denial was issued via Clarence Mitchell in October 2007 for some reason.
It is rumoured that the PJ leaked, but as we have seen with the UK media and Operation Grange, that doesn't mean they actually did say anything.
Are you sure an official denial over something so absurdly trivial was issued by Clarence Mitchell? Was he not pointing out that in his job he was not controlling the media?
The old "Monitor" in English which translates to "controlar" in Portuguese thing, which I've already mentioned.
Perhaps you would be good enough to supply a cite in support of your post ... then it might be a good idea to desist from deflecting from the topic which is ... Portuguese judicial secrecy law and its impact on the Madeleine case.
The leaks from the investigation to the Portuguese press were not designed to further Madeleine's case they were aimed at damaging her parents' reputation. At doing that, they have been very successful indeed in some quarters.
The problem is though, that the tactic used by the police of blatantly breaking the law and directing resources to one end calls into question just what it was they were doing to further Madeleine's investigation.
-
Russell was quoted by Sol in June 2007. I'm not sure why the denial was issued in October, but it was. I'm not deflecting because it's connected to Judicial secrecy according to the T7. As with the UK media, I expect most of the stories in Portugal were wild guesses when an unnamed source is mentioned. Perhaps cites supporting the accusations that the stories originated with the PJ could be provided?
"We wish to state that there is categorically no ‘pact of silence’ or indeed anything secretive between us - just the desire to assist the search for Madeleine," they said in a joint statement, released by the McCanns’ spokesman Clarence Mitchell.
"From day one, the police in Portugal told us not to discuss our statements.
"It is incredibly frustrating for us that the fact we have done as we were asked to by the Portuguese police is still being looked upon as suspicious.
"Everything we have done, and continue to do, has been to help with the search for Madeleine and to end this nightmare for Gerry and Kate."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1567702/Madeleine-McCann-Friends-deny-silence-pact.html
-
Russell was quoted by Sol in June 2007. I'm not sure why the denial was issued in October, but it was. I'm not deflecting because it's connected to Judicial secrecy according to the T7. As with the UK media, I expect most of the stories in Portugal were wild guesses when an unnamed source is mentioned. Perhaps cites supporting the accusations that the stories originated with the PJ could be provided?
"We wish to state that there is categorically no ‘pact of silence’ or indeed anything secretive between us - just the desire to assist the search for Madeleine," they said in a joint statement, released by the McCanns’ spokesman Clarence Mitchell.
"From day one, the police in Portugal told us not to discuss our statements.
"It is incredibly frustrating for us that the fact we have done as we were asked to by the Portuguese police is still being looked upon as suspicious.
"Everything we have done, and continue to do, has been to help with the search for Madeleine and to end this nightmare for Gerry and Kate."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1567702/Madeleine-McCann-Friends-deny-silence-pact.html
23rd September 2007
He has complained that while fellow officers were leaking information illegally — Portugal has strict secrecy laws — the same officers would instruct him to deny the stories when printed. The problem for Sousa was that the denials rarely got into the media.
The result has been endless column inches slandering the McCanns.
''Some Portuguese journalists were fairly convinced the so-called evidence passed on to them by police was nowhere near as concrete as their sources suggested," says Jose Lugios, a freelance reporter based in the Algarve.
"The way it works here is that we can't get official police comments so we have to rely on tip-offs from them.
We know they use us at times?…?as they did when they drip-fed us snippets that might exert enough pressure on the McCanns to confess.
But that's the strange way it works. It's the only way we can get crime stories."
Such lax practice has shocked even the country's politicians.
''The leaks to the press of some details that are supposed to be classified have been used as an easy way to manipulate and shape public opinion," says Francisco Louçã, leader of a Portuguese opposition party.
''It is clear the leaks have been used in a battle to turn public opinion against the McCanns and convince people they are guilty when there is no concrete evidence to support this," said another politician, who asked to remain anonymous.
For months the McCanns have been angered by snide suggestions that their PR machine, dubbed Team McCann — a term they hate — is too slick.
The truth is that it has not been, until now.
In Praia da Luz it was little more than a borrowed fax, two mobile telephones and Gerry McCann's Apple laptop. And while friends and family in the UK did what they could, in Portugal the McCanns had only one official spokesman, provided and paid for initially by the Foreign Office.
Last week that became a six-strong team, top-heavy on legal experts and media representatives.
That transformation was borne of necessity.
Not least because Mr Sousa's observation is nearer to the truth than he may know. What began as a tale of heartbreaking loss has become a fierce propaganda battle, punctuated by smears and in-fighting.
For an increasingly embittered Portuguese police force, to lose such a battle would mean world-wide ridicule, allegations that they have attempted to "fit up" an innocent mother and accusations from a £2.8 billion tourism industry that they were ruining the Algarve's reputation.
Yesterday there was additional embarrassment when it emerged unofficially that Robert Murat, the only other suspect in the case, is unlikely to face charges.
But the greater tragedy is that Madeleine's fate – to her parents' anguish – appears to have been forgotten.
Instead the propaganda war has led to lurid headlines such as "The DNA found in the McCanns' rented Renault Scenic, is 100 per cent positively that of Madeleine" and "McCanns killed Maddie with an accidental overdose of sedative".
Kate has been attacked as an unfit mother, who could not cope with her three toddlers and resented bearing the bulk of the child care; she had "lost control" in police interviews — proof, Portuguese officers concluded, that she was capable of having harmed her child; the sniffer dogs "reacted wildly to the scent of death" in the McCanns' car.
Then, on Friday, came the allegation that there were six hours of Madeleine's life unaccounted for on the afternoon of her disappearance. It was an accusation swiftly denied by Kate McCann's friends, who have consistently substantiated the family's version of events.
"The Portimão police were definitely furious that they were depicted as bumbling and ineffectual," confirms a Portuguese officer from another force.
"They were especially furious about stories of their long, drunken lunches and their alleged willingness to force a confession to cover their ineffectual investigations.
They know they made mistakes – a whole catalogue – from failing to secure the crime scene, to leaving the border with Spain open for a further twelve hours after Madeleine vanished, to returning the hire car to the McCanns despite having allegedly found incriminating evidence inside.
But their own press would never write critically of them – they need to keep the relationship sweet.
It was a slap in the face and a shock when the British press not only branded them inept but heaped ridicule upon them, too."
Chief Inspector Sousa could only look on in despair. He knew that these leaks were long on exaggeration.
Then came the McCann retaliation which, Mr Sousa must have known, would be brisk, logical and based on sound facts.
Possibly unnerved by a recent British newspaper poll which revealed that only 20 per cent of the public considered them utterly innocent, and that almost half thought they could have been involved in their daughter's death, the couple's response was swift.
Within hours of an announcement by the Portuguese attorney general that local police had not gathered enough evidence yet to press charges against them, the McCanns had re-hired Clarence Mitchell, a former BBC reporter who had originally been assigned to them by the Foreign Office.
Mitchell, canny, erudite and well versed in media hardball — whose salary, it is believed, is being covered by Brian Kennedy, the millionaire owner of Sale Sharks rugby club — turned the couple from victims to combatants.
He succinctly rebuffed the flimsy evidence against them, telling the Portuguese authorities to "put up or shut up".
Perhaps more significantly, the couple also swiftly assembled a world-class team of lawyers
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1563938/Madeleine-McCann-police-chief-breaks-silence.html
-
Chief Inspector Olegário Sousa said? We don't know what he said because he isn't quoted as saying anything, despite the headline. In fact the story confirms it;
"In public he has said nothing."
Privately, apparently, he confided in;
"a tight trio of trusted colleagues"
Did these 'trusted colleagues' immediately seek out a UK newspaper in order to betray their friend? The article doesn't have any named sources so it's difficult to judge.
Unsupported rumours imo.
-
Chief Inspector Olegário Sousa said? We don't know what he said because he isn't quoted as saying anything, despite the headline. In fact the story confirms it;
"In public he has said nothing."
Privately, apparently, he confided in;
"a tight trio of trusted colleagues"
Did these 'trusted colleagues' immediately seek out a UK newspaper in order to betray their friend? The article doesn't have any named sources so it's difficult to judge.
Unsupported rumours imo.
Please note I deliberately missed out what Chief Inspector Olegário Sousa had to say on the matter ... for the simple reason that the quotes were using friends as a vehicle.
One notes that Chief Inspector Olegário Sousa did not voice any objection to what his friends said on his behalf; very telling one would have thought.
The quote I cut and pasted is from the horse's mouth ... a journalist who made his living from police 'assistance' via leaks in criminal cases.
Snip
''Some Portuguese journalists were fairly convinced the so-called evidence passed on to them by police was nowhere near as concrete as their sources suggested," says Jose Lugios, a freelance reporter based in the Algarve.
"The way it works here is that we can't get official police comments so we have to rely on tip-offs from them.
We know they use us at times?…?as they did when they drip-fed us snippets that might exert enough pressure on the McCanns to confess.
But that's the strange way it works. It's the only way we can get crime stories."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1563938/Madeleine-McCann-police-chief-breaks-silence.html
Confirmation of what the Chief Inspector's friends told the press on his behalf?
However one does not require to rely on unattributed quotes from the Portuguese police to get a fair idea of the way in which the McCanns were disadvantaged when we have attributed quotes made under oath by a senior British police officer.
Leveson inquiry: ex-police chief defends not preventing false McCann DNA reports
Snip
The UK police were right not to "put the record straight" over false reports claiming Gerry and Kate McCann were implicated in their daughter's disappearance, the Leveson inquiry has heard.
Matthew Baggott, the former chief constable of Leicestershire police, told the inquiry on Wednesday he could not have released information about DNA tests conducted in the UK to counter leaks by the Portuguese police that falsely claimed they showed the McCanns had hidden Madeleine in the boot of a hire car in Portugal.
Baggott said there were both legal and professional reasons for this. Portuguese secrecy laws made it "utterly wrong to have somehow, in an off-the-record way, have breached what was a very clear legal requirement upon the Portuguese themselves", he told Lord Justice Leveson.
He also said the Leicestershire force's priority was to maintain a positive relationship with the Portuguese police, with a view to "eventually ... resolving what happened to that poor child".
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2012/mar/28/leveson-madeleine-mccann-dna-police
Therefore it is no "unsupported rumour" that the Portuguese police were releasing inaccurate information about Madeleine McCann's parents.
If you can think of one morally defensible reason why some consider that fine, it would be interesting to hear it.
-
Were the PJ accused by Leveson of leaking false information to the press or was that just the Guardian's opinion?
-
Were the PJ accused by Leveson of leaking false information to the press or was that just the Guardian's opinion?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-482007/Lies-beatings-secret-trials-dark-police-handling-Madeleine-case.html#ixzz0UzGpRERF
Worth a read for details about what was going on with the press at the time.
-
Were the PJ accused by Leveson of leaking false information to the press or was that just the Guardian's opinion?
Why on earth do you think Leveson would comment on the Policia Judiciaria media onslaught conducted against Madeleine's parents?
He was not a witness.
The witness was the former chief constable of Leicestershire police, Mathew Baggott.
His sworn evidence to the inquiry revealed that "leaks by the Portuguese police" ... "falsely claimed ~ the McCanns had hidden Madeleine in the boot of a hire car in Portugal."
The Guardian merely reported on the evidence presented to the inquiry ...
(a) the Policia Judiciaria leaked pejorative information to the Portuguese press
(b) the highly damaging information given to the Portuguese press was false
Former chief constable Baggott was aware of Portuguese Secrecy Laws and was mindful of them when considering the need for cooperation with the Portuguese on Madeleine's behalf.
Thus he reconciled himself to the knowledge the PJ were using the press to damage the reputations of Madeleine's parents while his own inaction allowed them further suffering.
The leak referred to was around the time of the 100% Madeleine's DNA headlines ... so nothing too trivial.
-
It seems it was Jerry Lawton of The Daily Star who mentioned leaks by the PJ. He knew it was true because his Portuguese media colleagues told him so. 8**8:/:
If the Portuguese press were shown the evidence by the PJ why did they get the details wrong? The press reports do not match what is in the police files.
I've been told by my colleagues in the Portuguese media that the leaks weren't a case of spurious gossip. Portuguese reporters were shown extracts of police files, hence the detail in some the leaks, which of course subsequently it's turned out to be in the police files.
http://leveson.sayit.mysociety.org/hearing-19-march-2012/mr-jeremy-lawton
Martin Brunt reported on the matter too. He said there were three interesting results. A full match to Madeleine's DNA was found on the window sill of 5A, a full match and a partial match in their hire car.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u3HQ74Rfdbk
You will search the police files in vain to find anything supporting what Brunt said.
-
It's quite strange when some people use unsubstantiated press reports to prove others were talking to the press.
-
It seems it was Jerry Lawton of The Daily Star who mentioned leaks by the PJ. He knew it was true because his Portuguese media colleagues told him so. 8**8:/:
If the Portuguese press were shown the evidence by the PJ why did they get the details wrong? The press reports do not match what is in the police files.
I've been told by my colleagues in the Portuguese media that the leaks weren't a case of spurious gossip. Portuguese reporters were shown extracts of police files, hence the detail in some the leaks, which of course subsequently it's turned out to be in the police files.
http://leveson.sayit.mysociety.org/hearing-19-march-2012/mr-jeremy-lawton
Martin Brunt reported on the matter too. He said there were three interesting results. A full match to Madeleine's DNA was found on the window sill of 5A, a full match and a partial match in their hire car.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u3HQ74Rfdbk
You will search the police files in vain to find anything supporting what Brunt said.
At last you are getting there.
The actualité of the situation is that many of the leaks given to the press were at best misunderstandings or at worse total pejorative fabrication.
What do you think the information given out contrary to Portuguese secrecy laws was intended to do ...
pay for the source's next family holiday?
assist in any way possible in the search for Madeleine McCann?
or to soften up public opinion while putting pressure on the targets of the opprobrium thus directed at them - namely Madeleine's parents?
Journalists took what was fed to them by 'a source close to the investigation' ... it didn't have to be accurate and in many cases it wasn't ... and that is the whole point.
The winners of this propaganda war were those in the Policia Judiciaria releasing the propaganda and those in the media selling it to an eager public.
The big loser was the missing child whose case was sidetracked by it all ... Madeleine McCann.
-
It's quite strange when some people use unsubstantiated press reports to prove others were talking to the press.
If your comment is directed at me ... have the courtesy to put up or shut up. Thank you.
-
At last you are getting there.
The actualité of the situation is that many of the leaks given to the press were at best misunderstandings or at worse total pejorative fabrication.
What do you think the information given out contrary to Portuguese secrecy laws was intended to do ...
pay for the source's next family holiday?
assist in any way possible in the search for Madeleine McCann?
or to soften up public opinion while putting pressure on the targets of the opprobrium thus directed at them - namely Madeleine's parents?
Journalists took what was fed to them by 'a source close to the investigation' ... it didn't have to be accurate and in many cases it wasn't ... and that is the whole point.
The winners of this propaganda war were those in the Policia Judiciaria releasing the propaganda and those in the media selling it to an eager public.
The big loser was the missing child whose case was sidetracked by it all ... Madeleine McCann.
Getting where? I have seen nothing which proves that the PJ leaked. All I have seen is reporters (both Portuguese and UK) trying to justify their speculative stories by blaming the PJ.
I find it quite mind boggling to suggest that the PJ leaked inaccurate information in an attempt to harm the McCann's reputation. That suggests that the PJ knowingly harmed their own reputation by leaking such untrue 'facts' as reported below;
Portuguese newspaper Diario de Noticias, citing informed investigation sources, said the couple had both admitted to giving Madeleine and their other two children a sedative on the night she vanished.
Belfast Telegraph 10 September 2007
The statements and evidence which have been gathered by Portuguese Police over the last 132 days is colossal, amounting to thousands of pages.
But they contain not just the much-discussed forensic reports of blood stains and other material but also, Channel 4 News understands, transcripts of recorded phone conversations the McCanns have had with others over many weeks. There is also evidence from emails they have sent and received.
Channel 4 news 10/9/2007
Police have claimed that forensic tests have found three DNA matches to the missing girl.
One came from the window sill of the family's holiday apartment in Praia da Luz and two from the Renault Scenic car the McCanns hired 25 days after the girl disappeared.
Metro 11/9/2007
Police are said to have been bugging the McCanns' phones and intercepting their emails for weeks. Reports in the Portuguese press have suggested that some of their conversations may have contradicted statements they gave to police. One newspaper suggested that the phone taps had helped satisfy police that the couple believed their daughter was dead.
Telegraph 12/9/2007
French investigative reporter Guilhem Battut said a report outlining how the four-year-old met her death was already with Portuguese prosecutors.
The newspaper France Soir said it contains scientific analysis of the bodily fluids found in the boot of the car hired by Kate and Gerry McCann which "prove that the little girl had ingested medicines, without doubt sleeping pills, in large quantities".
A source at the newspaper said 'We are not simply repeating rumours carried in other papers.
"This is not a theory, but a fact contained in hard evidence in the hands of the Portuguese authorities.
Mail 14/9/2007
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id109.htm
-
If your comment is directed at me ... have the courtesy to put up or shut up. Thank you.
No thanks.
-
There really is nothing new under the sun as far as the appearance of information detrimental to Madeleine's case and her parents emanating from illegally leaked information from the investigation is concerned.
All accompanied with the usual denials.
For example ... http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=5973.75
taken from
Jonbenet and Maddie: Case Studies in the Ethical Deficit of Contemporary Journalism
Professor Michael Tracey
Journalism and Mass Communication
University of Colorado at Boulder
Boulder, Colorado, 80309
USA
2.2 The Case of Madeleine McCann
By the following day at least one detective was telling journalists that there were doubts about whether Madeleine had really been abducted and that “police thought the couple were not telling the truth…” (Chrisman, 2007).
The story appeared the following day, Saturday May 5, in the respected Portuguese newspaper, Diario de Noticias.
The story, headlined “This Is A Very Badly Told Story,”had been written by Jose Manuel Oliveira who had received an off the record briefing by one of the top investigators of the Policia Judiciaria ( PJ ), the Portuguese criminal investigation police and said that “the headline/quote is based on the police and PJ sense that the testimonies gathered from the initial questioning of the McCanns, friends, and staff of the Ocean Club were confusing.
Oliveira believes this report was leaked because the PJ were beginning to have ‘doubts’ about the McCanns – that they were somehow connected or they knew someone who had had something to do with her disappearance – not at this stage that she might be dead.
Astonishingly Oliveria says he got the information from the PJ for this leak by 5pm., on the 4th May – less than 24 hours after Maddie disappeared…” ( Chrisman, 2007).
This was immediately denied by the JP, but on the 7th May Diario de Noticias published an article headlined “Police clues points to Madeleine’s death,” with an inside page headline “Port authority already looking for Madeleine’s body,” citing “police sources.”
At the same time another paper was reporting that police suspicions were based on the couple’s behavior, and one said that detectives “suspected them because their wives said Kate was too controlled to be the distraught mother” while another claimed forensic scientists reported that her controlled public appearance and make up indicated a “cold and manipulative” personality.
This narrative was unfolding at a time when Maddie’s disappearance could still be counted in hours.
http://www.ijhssnet.com/journals/Vol_3_No_15_August_2013/1.pdf
The thing is, information was being leaked directly from the police investigation to the Portuguese media et al some of which is reiterated on a daily basis ten years after the event.
Who was responsible for that if not the police ... and why did no-one in authority in Portugal think it might be appropriate to stop the law breaker from cocking a snook at the law of the land?
-
There really is nothing new under the sun as far as the appearance of information detrimental to Madeleine's case and her parents emanating from illegally leaked information from the investigation is concerned.
All accompanied with the usual denials.
For example ... http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=5973.75
taken from
Jonbenet and Maddie: Case Studies in the Ethical Deficit of Contemporary Journalism
Professor Michael Tracey
Journalism and Mass Communication
University of Colorado at Boulder
Boulder, Colorado, 80309
USA
2.2 The Case of Madeleine McCann
By the following day at least one detective was telling journalists that there were doubts about whether Madeleine had really been abducted and that “police thought the couple were not telling the truth…” (Chrisman, 2007).
The story appeared the following day, Saturday May 5, in the respected Portuguese newspaper, Diario de Noticias.
The story, headlined “This Is A Very Badly Told Story,”had been written by Jose Manuel Oliveira who had received an off the record briefing by one of the top investigators of the Policia Judiciaria ( PJ ), the Portuguese criminal investigation police and said that “the headline/quote is based on the police and PJ sense that the testimonies gathered from the initial questioning of the McCanns, friends, and staff of the Ocean Club were confusing.
Oliveira believes this report was leaked because the PJ were beginning to have ‘doubts’ about the McCanns – that they were somehow connected or they knew someone who had had something to do with her disappearance – not at this stage that she might be dead.
Astonishingly Oliveria says he got the information from the PJ for this leak by 5pm., on the 4th May – less than 24 hours after Maddie disappeared…” ( Chrisman, 2007).
This was immediately denied by the JP, but on the 7th May Diario de Noticias published an article headlined “Police clues points to Madeleine’s death,” with an inside page headline “Port authority already looking for Madeleine’s body,” citing “police sources.”
At the same time another paper was reporting that police suspicions were based on the couple’s behavior, and one said that detectives “suspected them because their wives said Kate was too controlled to be the distraught mother” while another claimed forensic scientists reported that her controlled public appearance and make up indicated a “cold and manipulative” personality.
This narrative was unfolding at a time when Maddie’s disappearance could still be counted in hours.
http://www.ijhssnet.com/journals/Vol_3_No_15_August_2013/1.pdf
The thing is, information was being leaked directly from the police investigation to the Portuguese media et al some of which is reiterated on a daily basis ten years after the event.
Who was responsible for that if not the police ... and why did no-one in authority in Portugal think it might be appropriate to stop the law breaker from cocking a snook at the law of the land?
Were the Tapas 9 interviews completed by 5pm on 4 May 2007? And how many staff had been interviewed? The latter telling the police what, exactly?
7th May DdN. Why would a police source say the port authorities were looking for a dead body? Were the McCanns supposed to have a magic flying carpet to transport a body to any port, even the nearest one, Lagos?
Sorry, there is a lot of drivel in here. I'm not shooting the messenger - I'm shooting the message, or parts of it.
I can imagine the 4 May 2007 'leak' emanating from Gerry saying he and Kate used the door requiring a key, whilst Kate torpedoed that saying she used the patio doors.
I also happen to find aspects of Matthew Oldfield's testimony baffling - the check on Madeleine that wasn't and an inability to state anything about the shutter, window and curtains. Off the top of my head, I cannot remember if his non-call to the police was in his first statement.
And I don't know when the jemmied shutters story was 'leaked' to the UK press, nor do I really care.
There was a lot of strange stuff going on, and unless Mr DdN man reveals his source, this remains part of the legacy of Madeleine McCann's disappearance.
-
There really is nothing new under the sun as far as the appearance of information detrimental to Madeleine's case and her parents emanating from illegally leaked information from the investigation is concerned.
All accompanied with the usual denials.
For example ... http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=5973.75
taken from
Jonbenet and Maddie: Case Studies in the Ethical Deficit of Contemporary Journalism
Professor Michael Tracey
Journalism and Mass Communication
University of Colorado at Boulder
Boulder, Colorado, 80309
USA
2.2 The Case of Madeleine McCann
By the following day at least one detective was telling journalists that there were doubts about whether Madeleine had really been abducted and that “police thought the couple were not telling the truth…” (Chrisman, 2007).
The story appeared the following day, Saturday May 5, in the respected Portuguese newspaper, Diario de Noticias.
The story, headlined “This Is A Very Badly Told Story,”had been written by Jose Manuel Oliveira who had received an off the record briefing by one of the top investigators of the Policia Judiciaria ( PJ ), the Portuguese criminal investigation police and said that “the headline/quote is based on the police and PJ sense that the testimonies gathered from the initial questioning of the McCanns, friends, and staff of the Ocean Club were confusing.
Oliveira believes this report was leaked because the PJ were beginning to have ‘doubts’ about the McCanns – that they were somehow connected or they knew someone who had had something to do with her disappearance – not at this stage that she might be dead.
Astonishingly Oliveria says he got the information from the PJ for this leak by 5pm., on the 4th May – less than 24 hours after Maddie disappeared…” ( Chrisman, 2007).
This was immediately denied by the JP, but on the 7th May Diario de Noticias published an article headlined “Police clues points to Madeleine’s death,” with an inside page headline “Port authority already looking for Madeleine’s body,” citing “police sources.”
At the same time another paper was reporting that police suspicions were based on the couple’s behavior, and one said that detectives “suspected them because their wives said Kate was too controlled to be the distraught mother” while another claimed forensic scientists reported that her controlled public appearance and make up indicated a “cold and manipulative” personality.
This narrative was unfolding at a time when Maddie’s disappearance could still be counted in hours.
http://www.ijhssnet.com/journals/Vol_3_No_15_August_2013/1.pdf
The thing is, information was being leaked directly from the police investigation to the Portuguese media et al some of which is reiterated on a daily basis ten years after the event.
Who was responsible for that if not the police ... and why did no-one in authority in Portugal think it might be appropriate to stop the law breaker from cocking a snook at the law of the land?
IMO the potential damaging effect on their tourist industry was paramount in the decision of some of those in authority to turn a blind eye to the blatant lawbreaking - in the hope that it would transpire that it was the British parents wot dunnit and the crime had nothing to do with any Portuguese person(s).
Bad news for Madeleine without a doubt imo.
-
Were the Tapas 9 interviews completed by 5pm on 4 May 2007? And how many staff had been interviewed? The latter telling the police what, exactly?
7th May DdN. Why would a police source say the port authorities were looking for a dead body? Were the McCanns supposed to have a magic flying carpet to transport a body to any port, even the nearest one, Lagos?
Sorry, there is a lot of drivel in here. I'm not shooting the messenger - I'm shooting the message, or parts of it.
I can imagine the 4 May 2007 'leak' emanating from Gerry saying he and Kate used the door requiring a key, whilst Kate torpedoed that saying she used the patio doors.
I also happen to find aspects of Matthew Oldfield's testimony baffling - the check on Madeleine that wasn't and an inability to state anything about the shutter, window and curtains. Off the top of my head, I cannot remember if his non-call to the police was in his first statement.
And I don't know when the jemmied shutters story was 'leaked' to the UK press, nor do I really care.
There was a lot of strange stuff going on, and unless Mr DdN man reveals his source, this remains part of the legacy of Madeleine McCann's disappearance.
In my opinion there have been many legacies of the 'strange stuff' which was in circulation emanating from Madeleine's disappearance.
First and foremost ... to date, Madeleine McCann has not been found.
There is a residue of those who are still victim of beliefs fabricated as part of the propaganda campaign waged to discredit her parents ... none of which has any foundation in fact.
What happened was inexcusable.
The secrecy law was being broken on a daily basis; no action was taken against the lawbreakers either to trace them or stop them; therefore condoning a shameful episode while undermining Portuguese jurisprudence.
I think Benice may very well have hit on part of the explanation for that when she says concern for the tourist industry may have been the catalyst.
I think those concerns would have been allayed by a swift and speedy response which cast a seriously intentioned net much wider than a Portuguese/British resident and two distraught parents who were causing waves by their insistence on remaining in Luz until it was made impossible for them to do so.
-
There really is nothing new under the sun as far as the appearance of information detrimental to Madeleine's case and her parents emanating from illegally leaked information from the investigation is concerned.
All accompanied with the usual denials.
For example ... http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=5973.75
taken from
Jonbenet and Maddie: Case Studies in the Ethical Deficit of Contemporary Journalism
Professor Michael Tracey
Journalism and Mass Communication
University of Colorado at Boulder
Boulder, Colorado, 80309
USA
2.2 The Case of Madeleine McCann
By the following day at least one detective was telling journalists that there were doubts about whether Madeleine had really been abducted and that “police thought the couple were not telling the truth…” (Chrisman, 2007).
The story appeared the following day, Saturday May 5, in the respected Portuguese newspaper, Diario de Noticias.
The story, headlined “This Is A Very Badly Told Story,”had been written by Jose Manuel Oliveira who had received an off the record briefing by one of the top investigators of the Policia Judiciaria ( PJ ), the Portuguese criminal investigation police and said that “the headline/quote is based on the police and PJ sense that the testimonies gathered from the initial questioning of the McCanns, friends, and staff of the Ocean Club were confusing.
Oliveira believes this report was leaked because the PJ were beginning to have ‘doubts’ about the McCanns – that they were somehow connected or they knew someone who had had something to do with her disappearance – not at this stage that she might be dead.
Astonishingly Oliveria says he got the information from the PJ for this leak by 5pm., on the 4th May – less than 24 hours after Maddie disappeared…” ( Chrisman, 2007).
This was immediately denied by the JP, but on the 7th May Diario de Noticias published an article headlined “Police clues points to Madeleine’s death,” with an inside page headline “Port authority already looking for Madeleine’s body,” citing “police sources.”
At the same time another paper was reporting that police suspicions were based on the couple’s behavior, and one said that detectives “suspected them because their wives said Kate was too controlled to be the distraught mother” while another claimed forensic scientists reported that her controlled public appearance and make up indicated a “cold and manipulative” personality.
This narrative was unfolding at a time when Maddie’s disappearance could still be counted in hours.
http://www.ijhssnet.com/journals/Vol_3_No_15_August_2013/1.pdf
The thing is, information was being leaked directly from the police investigation to the Portuguese media et al some of which is reiterated on a daily basis ten years after the event.
Who was responsible for that if not the police ... and why did no-one in authority in Portugal think it might be appropriate to stop the law breaker from cocking a snook at the law of the land?
Many stories have appeared about what Operation Grange are thinking and doing. Is Operation Grange leaking too? Most of the stories quote 'a source'.
-
Many stories have appeared about what Operation Grange are thinking and doing. Is Operation Grange leaking too? Most of the stories quote 'a source'.
I'm not familiar with the 'leaks' you claim ... can you cite them?
-
I'm not familiar with the 'leaks' you claim ... can you cite them?
'Operation Grange is going to dig 3 sites in Luz' - all through the press in May 2014.
June 2014 Operation Grange digs 3 sites in Luz.
-
'Operation Grange is going to dig 3 sites in Luz' - all through the press in May 2014.
June 2014 Operation Grange digs 3 sites in Luz.
Who said that came from Operation Grange?
-
Who said that came from Operation Grange?
Give me a source in the Portuguese press and it is up for grabs. Until then, as this effort was splattered across the UK press, work it out.
-
Give me a source in the Portuguese press and it is up for grabs. Until then, as this effort was splattered across the UK press, work it out.
The UK Press have been known to pick up leaks from Portugal in the past.
-
Who said that came from Operation Grange?
Unlikely to be from any where else.Jan 2014.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/madeleine-mccann-arrests-imminent-after-british-police-request-assistance-from-portuguese-9056176.html
A spokesperson representing Madeleine’s parents Kate and Gerry told The Mirror: “The letter is a significant development. It is necessary for British police to request the Portuguese authorities allow them to operate on their turf.
“It means they have the intention of arresting and interviewing X, Y or Z. We don’t know who they have their sights on but it’s likely it is the burglars.
“Whether the Portuguese will co-operate remains to be seen. It is a very sensitive issue with differences they have had.”
The spokesperson added that while it could be a “significant new lead”, Kate and Gerry did not want to build their hopes up too high.
July 2014 questioning of arguidos who lo and behold were supposed to be burglars.
-
Let's have a few Cites, shall we.
-
I'm not familiar with the 'leaks' you claim ... can you cite them?
I expect you've cut and pasted a lot of them. Any media story which says 'a source close to the investigation' or some such.
-
I expect you've cut and pasted a lot of them. Any media story which says 'a source close to the investigation' or some such.
In reply to Brietta's comment, this doesn't make sense. Please could you explain?
-
Given that Brietta must have cut & paste just about everything relevant to the case, G's comment makes sense to me.
-
Given that Brietta must have cut & paste just about everything relevant to the case, G's comment makes sense to me.
It would be appropriate if G-Unit would 'explain' her rather cryptic comments for herself and provide cites in support ... I admit I am rather bored by the shenanigans, but there we are.
Then perhaps we can get back to the subject matter of the thread which refers to the impact of judicial secrecy on Madeleine's case which in my opinion was profound.
-
It would be appropriate if G-Unit would 'explain' her rather cryptic comments for herself and provide cites in support ... I admit I am rather bored by the shenanigans, but there we are.
Then perhaps we can get back to the subject matter of the thread which refers to the impact of judicial secrecy on Madeleine's case which in my opinion was profound.
My comment was a reference to your habit of using newspaper articles to support your opinion. On this thread newspaper articles accusing the PJ of leaking are being used to support your opinion that the PJ breached judicial secrecy laws. That's ironic because the media started the rumour that the PJ had leaked, so what else are they going to say?
An examination of these so-called leaks shows that the media stories were not accurate representations of what the PJ were thinking and doing. I take that to mean that the PJ didn't leak. You, on the other hand, think they leaked inaccurate information for their own nefarious purposes. I think that's a bit far-fetched.
If we believe the rather sparse evidence that the PJ leaked, we have to accept that Operation Grange did too, because the stories quote the same source; someone 'close' to the investigation. No-one minds about the Met leaking, it seems.
-
My comment was a reference to your habit of using newspaper articles to support your opinion. On this thread newspaper articles accusing the PJ of leaking are being used to support your opinion that the PJ breached judicial secrecy laws. That's ironic because the media started the rumour that the PJ had leaked, so what else are they going to say?
An examination of these so-called leaks shows that the media stories were not accurate representations of what the PJ were thinking and doing. I take that to mean that the PJ didn't leak. You, on the other hand, think they leaked inaccurate information for their own nefarious purposes. I think that's a bit far-fetched.
If we believe the rather sparse evidence that the PJ leaked, we have to accept that Operation Grange did too, because the stories quote the same source; someone 'close' to the investigation. No-one minds about the Met leaking, it seems.
I agree totally with Brietta. The PJ leaks breached tgheir secrecy Laws and appear to have been attempts to destroy the public image of The Mccanns, Jane Tanner and the rest of the Tapas friends. Unkind people, in the UK mainly, have also done their level best to destroy them and Clarence Mitchell.
As mentioned in this thread false info and going against The Secrecy Laws, has been spread afar, in order to destroy their image and their standing. Sheer propaganda and disinformation has been the order of the day. Disgusting behaviour that would not be tolerated in a civilised Country, but seemingly ignored, even welcomed by many in Portugal.
You only have to look at other cases to see that certain elements of the PJ have used this technique to great advantage against the people "they" think they might be charging
!) Poor Michael Cook somehow had convictions for Paedophilia that were not true ++
2) Poor Jacintha Rees was doolally, so they said , because according to them she lit candles all around her as she sat in the road when her car was broken down in the hills. Maybe it is true, maybe not, but if broken down in the pitch black what a sesible move. Nothing to be ridiculed about that.
And, of course, she ran through the house axing herself in the head .... Blood all over and defence marks IIRC on her arms, but she managed four axe blows before she finally died. Just WHO do they think they are kidding?
3) Well where do you start with Leonor and Joao? Such unbelievably awful propaganda put out about them. I wont go into it here because it seems to upset John
4)
- The Mccanns were swingers etc.
- Kate couldn't cope etc.
- Kate wanted a priest and that was proof that she did it.
- They took the body in the car to get rid of it
.... after storing it in a freezer for was it five weeks? etc etc.
It is good to see you finding all these articles, Brietts. They show how widespread this churning out of propaganda was. And we have also seen the results of how it harms the victims.
If you have the energy, Brietta, keep going, it is clearly wearing the sceptics down. Take no notice of sceptics making nasty remarks. All they want is to stop you showing the PJ up with its breaking of Secrecy Laws and dissipation of disinformation. They dont like you showing the true situation. IMHO.
You and misty and others are doing very well 8@??)(. I just wish I had the energy to join you.
AIMHO
-
My comment was a reference to your habit of using newspaper articles to support your opinion. On this thread newspaper articles accusing the PJ of leaking are being used to support your opinion that the PJ breached judicial secrecy laws. That's ironic because the media started the rumour that the PJ had leaked, so what else are they going to say?
An examination of these so-called leaks shows that the media stories were not accurate representations of what the PJ were thinking and doing. I take that to mean that the PJ didn't leak. You, on the other hand, think they leaked inaccurate information for their own nefarious purposes. I think that's a bit far-fetched.
If we believe the rather sparse evidence that the PJ leaked, we have to accept that Operation Grange did too, because the stories quote the same source; someone 'close' to the investigation. No-one minds about the Met leaking, it seems.
What exactly is your explanation of exactly where Portuguese journalists sourced their information?
They were illegally writing about an active criminal investigation after all ... why on earth was no action taken against them?
They were easy enough to identify. Yet they were allowed to flout the criminal secrecy law with impunity on a daily basis the penalty for which was two years in jail.
How do you know what the PJ were thinking and doing?
The met were not involved in Portuguese investigations in 2007. The Policia Judiciaria were liaising with Leicestershire constabulary. There are many concerns about one leaking and the other not leaking.
As we have been informed on this thread cited from the Leveson Inquiry, Matthew Baggott, the former chief constable of Leicestershire police took the concept of judicial secrecy very much to heart.
As a result he allowed the erroneous DNA report which placed Madeleine's body in the boot of the car hired five weeks after her disappearance to stand unchallenged.
I await with anticipation the cites I have requested from you.
-
Day 25 - PM Leveson Inquiry 12 January 2012
Sworn evidence given by Peter Hill, editor of the Daily Express between December 2003 and February 2011
Q. Yes. Thank you. Your second statement, Mr Hill, deals with the McCanns.
A. Oh yes.
Q. Of course, you've given evidence to the Parliamentary Select Committee about this, haven't you?
A. Yes, extensively.
Q. Can I take you to that statement and refer to a number of points. At paragraph 2 --
A. What --
Q. This is in the second file under tab 23.
A. Oh, 23. Okay. Yes, paragraph 2.
Q. The question which was asked of you was in effect what fact checking your paper indulged in.
Your answer was:"That is a very, very good question. In this particular case, as I explained to you, the Portuguese police were unable, because of the legal restrictions in Portugal, to make any official comment on the case."
Then I paraphrase: they leaked things to the press and therefore checking the stories was not very easy.
And then you went on to say newspapers operate at high speed, et cetera.
////////
A. Of course. We published many, many, many, many stories of all kinds about the McCanns, many stories that were deeply sympathetic to them, some stories that were not.
Q. Yes, but the stories that were not were a little bit more than unsympathetic. Some of them went so far as to
accuse them of killing their child, didn't they?
A. This is what the Portuguese police were telling us.
Q. Yes, but regardless of that, we've already covered that issue, do you accept that some of --
A. You haven't covered it with me.
Q. Just wait, Mr Hill. Do you accept that some of your stories went so far as to accuse them of killing their child?
A. I did not accuse them of killing their child. The stories that I ran were from those who did accuse them, and they were the Portuguese police.
////////
Q. Well, the persistence of publication of the stories in relation to the McCanns, where some people might care
extremely deeply, because whether or not they're true and whether or not they're capable of damaging people is
a predominant consideration? Do you begin to see that difference?
A. I perfectly see the difference. On the McCanns story, the entire country had an opinion about that story, and
wherever you went, whether you went to a social gathering or, as somebody said, to the supermarket, people were talking about it and they all had an opinion about it, and these were opinions, these were stronger opinions, and these opinions were informed by the information that was coming from Portugal.
Now, we were not to know at the time that the Portuguese police were not behaving in a proper manner.
Portugal is a civilised country, part of the European Union. We had no reason to believe that its police force was not a proper body. So, as I explained to you, there was an enormous body of opinion on both sides of this story and you couldn't stop that. There was no stopping it.
Q. Apart from to stop publishing it, particularly --
A. That wouldn't have stopped it, because you couldn't -- well, as someone's explained, we now have the Internet,
we have Facebook, we have Twitter, we have all these different things. Information is -- it's a free-for -- it's an information free-for-all that we live in. So whether the newspapers stopped publishing would have made no difference. In fact, it might well have made it worse.
-
A lot of people were taken in by what the UK Press published. I know I was briefly, much to my continuing shame. This was before I began to look at the whole thing logically, and even for a while after I started reading The Mirror Forum.
There was very little access to the Portuguese opinions because no one understood Portuguese in those days, so we tended to believe what was being fed to us.
As Brietta has said, it never crossed our minds that certain elements in Portugal were blithely breaking their own secrecy laws, and blatantly lying, to which they have never been called to answer. The damage at the time was immeasurable. And it is still being churned out today.
-
Well I see lots of outrage and accusation, but no evidence being offered that the PJ leaked. Media people said they did, but that seems to have been their excuse for what they were reporting. Kind of 'It wasn't my fault, the Portuguese journalists told me and the PJ told them'. They reported rumour and gossip and then blamed everyone else. Lawton went so far as to blame Leicestershire Constabulary for not leaking! At least he admitted that he did not check that his sources were reliable.
-
Well I see lots of outrage and accusation, but no evidence being offered that the PJ leaked. Media people said they did, but that seems to have been their excuse for what they were reporting. Kind of 'It wasn't my fault, the Portuguese journalists told me and the PJ told them'. They reported rumour and gossip and then blamed everyone else. Lawton went so far as to blame Leicestershire Constabulary for not leaking! At least he admitted that he did not check that his sources were reliable.
Where do you think the leaks came from?
-
Where do you think the leaks came from?
I think it is quite possible that a policeman not involved in the case may have shared his opinion with a journalist. That way you get the police source, the inaccurate information and no breaking of Judicial Secrecy. The press will use any source available whether it is reliable or not.
-
I think it is quite possible that a policeman not involved in the case may have shared his opinion with a journalist. That way you get the police source, the inaccurate information and no breaking of Judicial Secrecy. The press will use any source available whether it is reliable or not.
This Policeman, not involved in the case, does seem to have known more than he ought.
-
I am truly astounded.
What lengths to defend the indefensible!
It is worth bearing in mind that the incident which led to Amaral's sacking was an injudicious rant by him to ... a journalist. It was unlawful.
Apparently not even the coordinator of the Madeleine investigation was above 'off the record' contact with journalists to discuss the case.
Whether that was over a late night meal or a telephone conversation it was contact where the circumstances concerning an active case were the topic of discussion. It was unlawful.
As affirmed by Amaral, on this occasion of unlawful contact it is obvious a line was crossed.
It is in direct breach of Article 86 of the Portuguese Criminal Procedure Code: precisely the law which constrained the McCanns from defending themselves.
In retrospect "astounded"?
I should not even have been slightly surprised or bemused. It is after all typical of apologists for what must be considered one of the most shamefully conducted criminal investigations in Portuguese history from which there remain a residue of those who have learned nothing.
The recent textbook reaction to a case of a missing child in Praia da Luz would indicate to me that thankfully, that is not the case as far as modern policing is concerned in Portugal.
-
This Policeman, not involved in the case, does seem to have known more than he ought.
When the police are quoted as the source they seem to know less than they ought. Either way it suggests a lot og guesswork and rumour by journalists;
TRACES of Madeleine McCann's blood have been discovered in the bedroom of the holiday flat where she was last seen, according to reports in a Portuguese newspaper. Jornal De Noticias, reported: "This evidence locates Madeleine's death inside the apartment, but the investigators are still not certain it was murder, despite the fact that forensic experts have revealed that somebody did try to erase the blood traces.
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/4aug7/SCOTSMAN_06_08_2007.htm
A source close to the investigation said that the McCanns and their friends would be interviewed as part a routine review of the investigation being carried out with the help of British police officers. He said that possible traces of blood in Madeleine's ground-floor bedroom could have come from any of the hundreds of people who had stayed in the apartment in recent years.
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/4aug7/FOXNEWS_08_08_2007.htm
The Portuguese reports have also turned their attention to the group the McCanns were on holiday with.
One paper even suggested that they were now "under surveillance" in the UK, reports which were denied as "laughable" by Portuguese and British authorities
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/4aug7/TELEGRAPH_09_08_2007.htm
-
When the police are quoted as the source they seem to know less than they ought. Either way it suggests a lot og guesswork and rumour by journalists;
TRACES of Madeleine McCann's blood have been discovered in the bedroom of the holiday flat where she was last seen, according to reports in a Portuguese newspaper. Jornal De Noticias, reported: "This evidence locates Madeleine's death inside the apartment, but the investigators are still not certain it was murder, despite the fact that forensic experts have revealed that somebody did try to erase the blood traces.
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/4aug7/SCOTSMAN_06_08_2007.htm
A source close to the investigation said that the McCanns and their friends would be interviewed as part a routine review of the investigation being carried out with the help of British police officers. He said that possible traces of blood in Madeleine's ground-floor bedroom could have come from any of the hundreds of people who had stayed in the apartment in recent years.
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/4aug7/FOXNEWS_08_08_2007.htm
The Portuguese reports have also turned their attention to the group the McCanns were on holiday with.
One paper even suggested that they were now "under surveillance" in the UK, reports which were denied as "laughable" by Portuguese and British authorities
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/4aug7/TELEGRAPH_09_08_2007.htm
They are saying it was Madeleine's blood even before they had confirmed it was Madeleine's blood. In the end they never proven it was from Madeleine for they were either male or mixed samples when they did the DNA tests on the many swabs.
-
They are saying it was Madeleine's blood even before they had confirmed it was Madeleine's blood. In the end they never proven it was from Madeleine for they were either male or mixed samples when they did the DNA tests on the many swabs.
Ooh, I know, those media types will say anything, won't they?
-
Ooh, I know, those media types will say anything, won't they?
When challenged they blame someone else too. I thought it was incumbent on reporters to check their sources. Had they done so they could have avoided paying out to the McCanns, couldn't they? Instead everyone blamed PJ leaks, no doubt knowing how difficult the PJ would find it to rebut those accusations.
Portugal's Judicial secrecy laws seem to have worked in the McCann's favour imo. It allowed them to avoid answering questions and to accuse the PJ of leaking at every opportunity.
-
Day 25 - PM Leveson Inquiry 12 January 2012
Sworn evidence given by Peter Hill, editor of the Daily Express between December 2003 and February 2011
Q. Yes. Thank you. Your second statement, Mr Hill, deals with the McCanns.
A. Oh yes.
Q. Of course, you've given evidence to the Parliamentary Select Committee about this, haven't you?
A. Yes, extensively.
Q. Can I take you to that statement and refer to a number of points. At paragraph 2 --
A. What --
Q. This is in the second file under tab 23.
A. Oh, 23. Okay. Yes, paragraph 2.
Q. The question which was asked of you was in effect what fact checking your paper indulged in.
Your answer was:"That is a very, very good question. In this particular case, as I explained to you, the Portuguese police were unable, because of the legal restrictions in Portugal, to make any official comment on the case."
Then I paraphrase: they leaked things to the press and therefore checking the stories was not very easy.
And then you went on to say newspapers operate at high speed, et cetera.
////////
A. Of course. We published many, many, many, many stories of all kinds about the McCanns, many stories that were deeply sympathetic to them, some stories that were not.
Q. Yes, but the stories that were not were a little bit more than unsympathetic. Some of them went so far as to
accuse them of killing their child, didn't they?
A. This is what the Portuguese police were telling us.
Q. Yes, but regardless of that, we've already covered that issue, do you accept that some of --
A. You haven't covered it with me.
Q. Just wait, Mr Hill. Do you accept that some of your stories went so far as to accuse them of killing their child?
A. I did not accuse them of killing their child. The stories that I ran were from those who did accuse them, and they were the Portuguese police.
////////
Q. Well, the persistence of publication of the stories in relation to the McCanns, where some people might care
extremely deeply, because whether or not they're true and whether or not they're capable of damaging people is
a predominant consideration? Do you begin to see that difference?
A. I perfectly see the difference. On the McCanns story, the entire country had an opinion about that story, and
wherever you went, whether you went to a social gathering or, as somebody said, to the supermarket, people were talking about it and they all had an opinion about it, and these were opinions, these were stronger opinions, and these opinions were informed by the information that was coming from Portugal.
Now, we were not to know at the time that the Portuguese police were not behaving in a proper manner.
Portugal is a civilised country, part of the European Union. We had no reason to believe that its police force was not a proper body. So, as I explained to you, there was an enormous body of opinion on both sides of this story and you couldn't stop that. There was no stopping it.
Q. Apart from to stop publishing it, particularly --
A. That wouldn't have stopped it, because you couldn't -- well, as someone's explained, we now have the Internet,
we have Facebook, we have Twitter, we have all these different things. Information is -- it's a free-for -- it's an information free-for-all that we live in. So whether the newspapers stopped publishing would have made no difference. In fact, it might well have made it worse.
Surely the editor of the Express is not suggesting that the police force of an EU member state is not "a proper body".
Gimme a break [best not say that to the Portuguese Police some think they may misconstrue !]
As the invstigating judge is the arbiter on what constitutes judicial secrecy on his cases I would suggest unless anyone has been canvassing his opinion one way or another the answer is a lemon.
-
Surely the editor of the Express is not suggesting that the police force of an EU member state is not "a proper body".
Gimme a break [best not say that to the Portuguese Police some think they may misconstrue !]
As the invstigating judge is the arbiter on what constitutes judicial secrecy on his cases I would suggest unless anyone has been canvassing his opinion one way or another the answer is a lemon.
It could be a case of the Express believing its own propaganda.
-
It could be a case of the Express believing its own propaganda.
The editor was giving evidence under oath.
It is well known that here as in Portugal, perjury is an offence for which there are penalties.
-
Surely the editor of the Express is not suggesting that the police force of an EU member state is not "a proper body".
Gimme a break [best not say that to the Portuguese Police some think they may misconstrue !]
As the invstigating judge is the arbiter on what constitutes judicial secrecy on his cases I would suggest unless anyone has been canvassing his opinion one way or another the answer is a lemon.
Ah yes, The Express.
Not known for It's accuracy.
Apparently, according to today's edition Niburu should be of concern. *&*%£
-
The editor was giving evidence under oath.
It is well known that here as in Portugal, perjury is an offence for which there are penalties.
Jonathon Aitken and Jeffrey Archer also gave evidence under oath. Your point is ?
-
The editor was giving evidence under oath.
It is well known that here as in Portugal, perjury is an offence for which there are penalties.
There is no reason to believe he was lying, but he was probably defaming when he said;
Now, we were not to know at the time that the Portuguese police were not behaving in a proper manner.
Portugal is a civilised country, part of the European Union. We had no reason to believe that its police force was not a proper body.
-
There is no reason to believe he was lying, but he was probably defaming when he said;
Now, we were not to know at the time that the Portuguese police were not behaving in a proper manner.
Portugal is a civilised country, part of the European Union. We had no reason to believe that its police force was not a proper body.
He was voicing an opinion based on observation and experience.
-
There is no reason to believe he was lying, but he was probably defaming when he said;
Now, we were not to know at the time that the Portuguese police were not behaving in a proper manner.
Portugal is a civilised country, part of the European Union. We had no reason to believe that its police force was not a proper body.
Though you can't libel a body like the police, policemen yes, the police no.
-
There is no reason to believe he was lying, but he was probably defaming when he said;
Now, we were not to know at the time that the Portuguese police were not behaving in a proper manner.
Portugal is a civilised country, part of the European Union. We had no reason to believe that its police force was not a proper body.
He wasn't wrong. No one realised what The PJ were doing. Everyone believed that this was a proper Police Force.
They clearly weren't at the time. What that little enclave on The Algarve did was absolutely diabolical.
-
Though you can't libel a body like the police, policemen yes, the police no.
Oh, really. What was going on on The Algarve at the time was the epitome of The Portuguese Police. They got their Convictions by Public Opinion.
-
He wasn't wrong. No one realised what The PJ were doing. Everyone believed that this was a proper Police Force.
They clearly weren't at the time. What that little enclave on The Algarve did was absolutely diabolical.
What is diabolical about investigating the parents of a kid missing under suspicious circumstances? Every police force in the world would have done the same given the background and evidence surely?
-
What is diabolical about investigating the parents of a kid missing under suspicious circumstances? Every police force in the world would have done the same given the background and evidence surely?
I agree that every police force in the world would have looked at the parents first. The issue is not about procedure, it's all about the integrity of the people paid to investigate crime.
-
Oh, really. What was going on on The Algarve at the time was the epitome of The Portuguese Police. They got their Convictions by Public Opinion.
They got their Convictions by Public Opinion whipped up by salacious rumours using libellous disinformation and propaganda IMHO ... with very little FACT.
In some cases NO FACT
Oh .... and by TORTURE and false witness statements later rescinded.
-
What is diabolical about investigating the parents of a kid missing under suspicious circumstances? Every police force in the world would have done the same given the background and evidence surely?
"Kid". How utterly awful. But never mind. It was only ever some "Kid".
You have it away. And I seriously hope that you will be ashamed.
-
The editor was giving evidence under oath.
It is well known that here as in Portugal, perjury is an offence for which there are penalties.
Not that he was an editor, of course.
-
Not that he was an editor, of course.
I'm talking about this guy ...
Day 25 - PM Leveson Inquiry 12 January 2012
Sworn evidence given by Peter Hill, editor of the Daily Express between December 2003 and February 2011
Who are you talking about?
-
I'm talking about this guy ...
Day 25 - PM Leveson Inquiry 12 January 2012
Sworn evidence given by Peter Hill, editor of the Daily Express between December 2003 and February 2011
Who are you talking about?
Sorry, I got mixed up. I notice he had no real answer to this question;
Jay asked him: “What did you do to check on the validity of those stories?”
Hill replied: “We did the best that we could do, which was not very much.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/01/12/leveson-inquiry-former-express-editor-peter-hill_n_1201849.html
-
Sorry, I got mixed up. I notice he had no real answer to this question;
Jay asked him: “What did you do to check on the validity of those stories?”
Hill replied: “We did the best that we could do, which was not very much.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/01/12/leveson-inquiry-former-express-editor-peter-hill_n_1201849.html
Perhaps he was relaxed about the validity of information received from what he may have believed at the time was an impeccable source.
Snip
Explaining why his paper published negative stories about the couple, Hill told the inquiry:
“I did not accuse them of killing their child. The stories that we ran were from those who did accuse them, and they were the Portuguese police.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/01/12/leveson-inquiry-former-express-editor-peter-hill_n_1201849.html
-
What is diabolical about investigating the parents of a kid missing under suspicious circumstances? Every police force in the world would have done the same given the background and evidence surely?
No.
-
Ooh, I know, those media types will say anything, won't they?
Who fed them the disinformation, do you think?
-
Surely the editor of the Express is not suggesting that the police force of an EU member state is not "a proper body".
Gimme a break [best not say that to the Portuguese Police some think they may misconstrue !]
As the invstigating judge is the arbiter on what constitutes judicial secrecy on his cases I would suggest unless anyone has been canvassing his opinion one way or another the answer is a lemon.
@)(++(*
First time i have laughed at any of your ermm "jokes", Alice, but this was a good one
-
Perhaps he was relaxed about the validity of information received from what he may have believed at the time was an impeccable source.
Snip
Explaining why his paper published negative stories about the couple, Hill told the inquiry:
“I did not accuse them of killing their child. The stories that we ran were from those who did accuse them, and they were the Portuguese police.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/01/12/leveson-inquiry-former-express-editor-peter-hill_n_1201849.html
As I recall the PJ never accused the McCanns of killing anyone, so that statement is false.
In the end, when challenged, the newspapers were unable to defend their actions and paid the McCanns half a million in damages. That means they did not have impeccable sources. The PJ were not the source of some of their stories;
Additional examples were given including stories that Madeleine had been "sold" to ease financial burdens and that the McCanns were involved in "swinging" or "wife-swapping orgies".
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2008/mar/19/pressandpublishing.medialaw
-
As I recall the PJ never accused the McCanns of killing anyone, so that statement is false.
In the end, when challenged, the newspapers were unable to defend their actions and paid the McCanns half a million in damages. That means they did not have impeccable sources. The PJ were not the source of some of their stories;
Additional examples were given including stories that Madeleine had been "sold" to ease financial burdens and that the McCanns were involved in "swinging" or "wife-swapping orgies".
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2008/mar/19/pressandpublishing.medialaw
Please remember to indicate when you are expressing your opinion and your interpretation of events which with all due respect you know absolutely nothing about.
I recommend that rather than using the paraphrased accounts of newspapers you find a version of the actual evidence presented to the Leveson Inquiry.
For example ... arising from David Pilditch's sworn testimony ...
12.19pm: Jay says a further Express story reporting DNA "findings" that Madeleine's body had been in the spare tyre-well in the boot was also inaccurate.
The DNA evidence was "at best inconclusive", says Jay. He refers to the testimony of the McCann's four weeks ago who said it was "simply untrue" .
"Madeleine's DNA was not uncovered in the hire car," Jay points out.
Pilditch says "we know that now, but we didn't know that then" adding the local police were briefing that there were links.
////////
12.59pm: Sherborne wants to put it on record that there is nothing in the police files to suggest that Madeleine's DNA was found in a car referred to in one of Pilditch's articles.
Leveson explains he is conducting an investigation into press ethics but is happy to put it on record that this is indeed the case.
Everybody is agreed that there is absolutely no foundation at all for the allegation that emerged throughout the press at this time that Dr and Dr McCann were involved in any way, in any inappropriate conduct in relation to the disappearance of their daughter.
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2011/dec/21/leveson-inquiry-james-hipwell-live#block-62
The question arises as to why the Portuguese police leaked that particular story?
-
As I recall the PJ never accused the McCanns of killing anyone, so that statement is false.
In the end, when challenged, the newspapers were unable to defend their actions and paid the McCanns half a million in damages. That means they did not have impeccable sources. The PJ were not the source of some of their stories;
Additional examples were given including stories that Madeleine had been "sold" to ease financial burdens and that the McCanns were involved in "swinging" or "wife-swapping orgies".
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2008/mar/19/pressandpublishing.medialaw
I think we all know by now that some so-called professional journalists make up stories in order to enhance their bank accounts. The old 'a source' label has allowed them to do this without being forced to reveal their sources. Editors too have much to be ashamed of including front page headlines such as, "Maddie found in Greece" or "Maddie found in Ireland".
(http://i.huffpost.com/gen/1421582/thumbs/o-MADDIE-570.jpg?7)
-
One of the Express journalists was honest about where they got their stories. They seem to have relied on Portuguese journalists to brief them. Padraic Flanagan said;
With regard to specific exampies I wrote a story on 25 October 2007 regarding certain questions that the police wanted to put to the McCanns. This was sourced directly from a police contact of a journalist in the Portuguese media. These were questions that the police intended to bring to Britain, to be put directly to the McCanns. I believe that The Mirror, The Daily Mail, and The Sun picked up this story a!so, The quote regarding the questions came directly from the crime correspondent of a prominent Portuguese newspaper. We often used him in fact to verify our information, as his material consistently proved accurate.
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/sitebuilderfiles/witnessstatementofpadraicflanagan.pdf
The questions are listed in this Mail article and are not, on the whole, questions that were going to be asked of the McCanns holiday companions. They were certainly never intended for the McCanns.
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/6oct7/24_10_2007.htm
-
One of the Express journalists was honest about where they got their stories. They seem to have relied on Portuguese journalists to brief them. Padraic Flanagan said;
With regard to specific exampies I wrote a story on 25 October 2007 regarding certain questions that the police wanted to put to the McCanns. This was sourced directly from a police contact of a journalist in the Portuguese media. These were questions that the police intended to bring to Britain, to be put directly to the McCanns. I believe that The Mirror, The Daily Mail, and The Sun picked up this story a!so, The quote regarding the questions came directly from the crime correspondent of a prominent Portuguese newspaper. We often used him in fact to verify our information, as his material consistently proved accurate.
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/sitebuilderfiles/witnessstatementofpadraicflanagan.pdf
The questions are listed in this Mail article and are not, on the whole, questions that were going to be asked of the McCanns holiday companions. They were certainly never intended for the McCanns.
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/6oct7/24_10_2007.htm
All the journalists interviewed under oath gave a list of their sources and in David Piditch's transcript he goes into great detail of the lengths he went to to check and verify those souces and the information emanating from them.
All the journalists interviewed under oath detailed the role of the Portuguese police in the dissemination of that information.
Indeed Pilditch asserts under oath that senior detectives in the Portuguese police were briefing "off the record".
He also gives an opinion of the secrecy laws as they applied to Madeleine's case. Just reading what he had to say is illuminating regarding the potential for use and abuse.
Wonder who the 'senior detectives' he mentioned are?
-
All the journalists interviewed under oath gave a list of their sources and in David Piditch's transcript he goes into great detail of the lengths he went to to check and verify those souces and the information emanating from them.
All the journalists interviewed under oath detailed the role of the Portuguese police in the dissemination of that information.
Indeed Pilditch asserts under oath that senior detectives in the Portuguese police were briefing "off the record".
He also gives an opinion of the secrecy laws as they applied to Madeleine's case. Just reading what he had to say is illuminating regarding the potential for use and abuse.
Wonder who the 'senior detectives' he mentioned are?
All the journalists seem to have believed the Portuguese journalists who said they had contacts within the investigation. Whether the Portuguese journalists were telling the truth is another matter. The 'most senior' officers (see below) investigating Madeleine's disappearance? Encarnacao and Neves were the most senior, followed by Amaral.
Piditch names 3 sources;
I had three sources in Portugal who provided me with information. Two were Portuguese journalists who
were in daily contact with the most senior officers investigating Madeieine McCann’s disappearance. The third was a translator who worked for the Portuguese Police and translating and interpreting in the Portuguese legal system.
On every occasion, Portuguese police refused to comment on grounds that the inquiry was subject to
judicial secrecy.
Leicestershire Police...referred all journalists to their Portuguese counterparts - who refused to comment,
The aspect that made the case truly unusual was the wall of silence and lack of guidance to journalists from police both in Portugal and the UK
In the absence of these critical sources or official comment that could be attributed to a named police source or authority, I took steps to obtain the relevant information by the best available route. ~ approached news/TV reporters who had solid contacts within the Portuguese police for information on the investigation and relied on the services of Mr Mitchell as a third party spokesman for Drs McCann
https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/sitebuilderfiles/witnessstatementofdavidpilditch.pdf
-
All the journalists seem to have believed the Portuguese journalists who said they had contacts within the investigation. Whether the Portuguese journalists were telling the truth is another matter. The 'most senior' officers (see below) investigating Madeleine's disappearance? Encarnacao and Neves were the most senior, followed by Amaral.
Piditch names 3 sources;
I had three sources in Portugal who provided me with information. Two were Portuguese journalists who
were in daily contact with the most senior officers investigating Madeieine McCann’s disappearance. The third was a translator who worked for the Portuguese Police and translating and interpreting in the Portuguese legal system.
On every occasion, Portuguese police refused to comment on grounds that the inquiry was subject to
judicial secrecy.
Leicestershire Police...referred all journalists to their Portuguese counterparts - who refused to comment,
The aspect that made the case truly unusual was the wall of silence and lack of guidance to journalists from police both in Portugal and the UK
In the absence of these critical sources or official comment that could be attributed to a named police source or authority, I took steps to obtain the relevant information by the best available route. ~ approached news/TV reporters who had solid contacts within the Portuguese police for information on the investigation and relied on the services of Mr Mitchell as a third party spokesman for Drs McCann
https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/sitebuilderfiles/witnessstatementofdavidpilditch.pdf
Senior officers of the Portuguese police are listed amongst informants by journalists under oath; and the Leveson inquiry has reinforced the certainty that Madeleine's DNA was not in the car hired by her parents weeks after she vanished.
Do you agree with both of those assertions?
-
Senior officers of the Portuguese police are listed amongst informants by journalists under oath; and the Leveson inquiry has reinforced the certainty that Madeleine's DNA was not in the car hired by her parents weeks after she vanished.
Do you agree with both of those assertions?
Journalist said under oath that they were told by Portuguese journalists that the PJ leaked. That doesn't mean the Portuguese journalists told the truth, of course. I found the mention of a translator being a source interesting.
I'm not sure about your second statement. I thought it was the '100% match' which caused problems? Not that I think that she or her DNA was in the car anyway. It certainly wasn't on her bedroom windowsill either, as some stories said. The Portuguese journalist's sources let them down on that one.
-
Journalist said under oath that they were told by Portuguese journalists that the PJ leaked. That doesn't mean the Portuguese journalists told the truth, of course. I found the mention of a translator being a source interesting.
I'm not sure about your second statement. I thought it was the '100% match' which caused problems? Not that I think that she or her DNA was in the car anyway. It certainly wasn't on her bedroom windowsill either, as some stories said. The Portuguese journalist's sources let them down on that one.
In evidence Pilditch mentions 'senior officers' ... with respect, I think he will know rather more about who was leaking information and misinformation than you.
There was none of Madeleine's DNA found in the hire car. That is a fact. Just as it is a fact the investigation was leaking like a sieve.
Everyone in Luz who could, appeared to be intent on totally disregarding the secrecy laws ~ so why should it surprise you that a translator should not be exempt from leaping on the band wagon?
Who better than one who may translate on occasion for the police?
Quote
Thus it is that like almost everything else being broadcast and published beyond Portugal's borders about the hunt for Madeleine, the claim that the police want to read Kate's diary has reached its audience via Hugo Beaty's bar.
Every day there starts the same way shortly after it opens at 9am, with an informal briefing to the foreign Press by a locally resident British woman who normally makes a meagre living acting as an occasional interpreter – for the Policia Judiciaria.
Every morning, the woman – who asked me not to publish her name – goes through the Portuguese tabloids and translates their ever-more febrile articles.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-482007/Lies-beatings-secret-trials-dark-police-handling-Madeleine-case.html#ixzz4pH2xTS1s
-
In evidence Pilditch mentions 'senior officers' ... with respect, I think he will know rather more about who was leaking information and misinformation than you.
There was none of Madeleine's DNA found in the hire car. That is a fact. Just as it is a fact the investigation was leaking like a sieve.
Everyone in Luz who could, appeared to be intent on totally disregarding the secrecy laws ~ so why should it surprise you that an translator should not be exempt from leaping on the band wagon?
Who better than one who may translate on occasion for the police?
Quote
Thus it is that like almost everything else being broadcast and published beyond Portugal's borders about the hunt for Madeleine, the claim that the police want to read Kate's diary has reached its audience via Hugo Beaty's bar.
Every day there starts the same way shortly after it opens at 9am, with an informal briefing to the foreign Press by a locally resident British woman who normally makes a meagre living acting as an occasional interpreter – for the Policia Judiciaria.
Every morning, the woman – who asked me not to publish her name – goes through the Portuguese tabloids and translates their ever-more febrile articles.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-482007/Lies-beatings-secret-trials-dark-police-handling-Madeleine-case.html#ixzz4pH2xTS1s
I think not. He was relying on Portuguese journalists for his information, not the officers in question.
-
I think not. He was relying on Portuguese journalists for his information, not the officers in question.
"Senior officers."
The words are not mine.
The words were said under oath.
The problem among some is that the truth is not as agreeable as the lie.
-
In evidence Pilditch mentions 'senior officers' ... with respect, I think he will know rather more about who was leaking information and misinformation than you.
There was none of Madeleine's DNA found in the hire car. That is a fact. Just as it is a fact the investigation was leaking like a sieve.
Everyone in Luz who could, appeared to be intent on totally disregarding the secrecy laws ~ so why should it surprise you that an translator should not be exempt from leaping on the band wagon?
Who better than one who may translate on occasion for the police?
Quote
Thus it is that like almost everything else being broadcast and published beyond Portugal's borders about the hunt for Madeleine, the claim that the police want to read Kate's diary has reached its audience via Hugo Beaty's bar.
Every day there starts the same way shortly after it opens at 9am, with an informal briefing to the foreign Press by a locally resident British woman who normally makes a meagre living acting as an occasional interpreter – for the Policia Judiciaria.
Every morning, the woman – who asked me not to publish her name – goes through the Portuguese tabloids and translates their ever-more febrile articles.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-482007/Lies-beatings-secret-trials-dark-police-handling-Madeleine-case.html#ixzz4pH2xTS1s
Could one make this up?
If I had written this as a work of fiction, I would assume my opus magnus would never have seen the light of day.
Now we are on the hunt for a locally-resident English woman who makes a meagre living translating for the PJ.
No doubt she will be in the PJ Files on a statement or two.
Should we enquire also as to whether she wore a plum-coloured dress to these 'briefings'?
For the record, Hugo Beatty's is a pleasant spot for nosh, with a restaurant, adjacent but separate bar, and a lounge with large screen sports TV. I have no idea why the media chose to congregate there in 2007, when there were many alternatives in Luz.
-
Could one make this up?
If I had written this as a work of fiction, I would assume my opus magnus would never have seen the light of day.
Now we are on the hunt for a locally-resident English woman who makes a meagre living translating for the PJ.
No doubt she will be in the PJ Files on a statement or two.
Should we enquire also as to whether she wore a plum-coloured dress to these 'briefings'?
For the record, Hugo Beatty's is a pleasant spot for nosh, with a restaurant, adjacent but separate bar, and a lounge with large screen sports TV. I have no idea why the media chose to congregate there in 2007, when there were many alternatives in Luz.
Why on earth are you over-reacting like this?
Who is on any hunt for anyone? Why introduce a plum coloured dress? You are not making logical sense SIL.
Soz, SIL, but what is it about Brietta that you have to go at her all the time ?
-
Could one make this up?
If I had written this as a work of fiction, I would assume my opus magnus would never have seen the light of day.
Now we are on the hunt for a locally-resident English woman who makes a meagre living translating for the PJ.
No doubt she will be in the PJ Files on a statement or two.
Should we enquire also as to whether she wore a plum-coloured dress to these 'briefings'?
For the record, Hugo Beatty's is a pleasant spot for nosh, with a restaurant, adjacent but separate bar, and a lounge with large screen sports TV. I have no idea why the media chose to congregate there in 2007, when there were many alternatives in Luz.
You may be "on the hunt for a locally-resident English woman who makes a meagre living translating for the PJ", if that's what floats your boat, you will have no complaint from me.
I recognise it for the attempted deflection it so obviously is.
I find it far more interesting to hear from the horses' mouths so to speak, the genesis of and the mechanics of the ten year long propaganda campaign conducted against crime victims; and all under the convenient umbrella provided by Portugal's secrecy laws.
People unlike you, who were present in Luz at the time and used the system operating to flout the law.
Lies and misinformation designed to and which did succeed to defame and make suspects of innocent people by lawbreakers; but the whistle has been blown on that and the fact of the matter revealed; yet there remain those who prefer to deny the truth and defend the lie.
Did manipulation of the secrecy law damage the investigation into Madeleine's disappearance? I fear so.
Did manipulation of the secrecy law damage her parents and their campaign on her behalf? I fear so.
-
You may be "on the hunt for a locally-resident English woman who makes a meagre living translating for the PJ", if that's what floats your boat, you will have no complaint from me.
I recognise it for the attempted deflection it so obviously is.
I find it far more interesting to hear from the horses' mouths so to speak, the genesis of and the mechanics of the ten year long propaganda campaign conducted against crime victims; and all under the convenient umbrella provided by Portugal's secrecy laws.
People unlike you, who were present in Luz at the time and used the system operating to flout the law.
Lies and misinformation designed to and which did succeed to defame and make suspects of innocent people by lawbreakers; but the whistle has been blown on that and the fact of the matter revealed; yet there remain those who prefer to deny the truth and defend the lie.
Did manipulation of the secrecy law damage the investigation into Madeleine's disappearance? I fear so.
Did manipulation of the secrecy law damage her parents and their campaign on her behalf? I fear so.
The last two sentences are purely your opinion Brietta, and there is no evidence to back it up.
What also of the leaks to the press by close friends of the Mccann's ?
-
Why on earth are you over-reacting like this?
Who is on any hunt for anyone? Why introduce a plum coloured dress? You are not making logical sense SIL.
Soz, SIL, but what is it about Brietta that you have to go at her all the time ?
Sadie, kindly stop trying to moderate my posts.
I am not having a go at Brietta.
I am having a laugh about a woman (who probably exists) going into Hugo Beatty's each day to 'brief' the foreign press on what the Portuguese press were saying (which may well have happened). This something straight out of a Brian Rix farce.
As to the plum-coloured dress, surely you are aware that is the 'final' final lead, at least until the next final lead?
-
You may be "on the hunt for a locally-resident English woman who makes a meagre living translating for the PJ", if that's what floats your boat, you will have no complaint from me.
I recognise it for the attempted deflection it so obviously is.
I find it far more interesting to hear from the horses' mouths so to speak, the genesis of and the mechanics of the ten year long propaganda campaign conducted against crime victims; and all under the convenient umbrella provided by Portugal's secrecy laws.
People unlike you, who were present in Luz at the time and used the system operating to flout the law.
Lies and misinformation designed to and which did succeed to defame and make suspects of innocent people by lawbreakers; but the whistle has been blown on that and the fact of the matter revealed; yet there remain those who prefer to deny the truth and defend the lie.
Did manipulation of the secrecy law damage the investigation into Madeleine's disappearance? I fear so.
Did manipulation of the secrecy law damage her parents and their campaign on her behalf? I fear so.
To be blunt, I find the part that I have bolded offensive.
Kindly stop introducing an idea, then when I comment on YOUR post, criticise me for deflecting.
Northampton Town sums it up.
-
You may be "on the hunt for a locally-resident English woman who makes a meagre living translating for the PJ", if that's what floats your boat, you will have no complaint from me.
I recognise it for the attempted deflection it so obviously is.
I find it far more interesting to hear from the horses' mouths so to speak, the genesis of and the mechanics of the ten year long propaganda campaign conducted against crime victims; and all under the convenient umbrella provided by Portugal's secrecy laws.
People unlike you, who were present in Luz at the time and used the system operating to flout the law.
Lies and misinformation designed to and which did succeed to defame and make suspects of innocent people by lawbreakers; but the whistle has been blown on that and the fact of the matter revealed; yet there remain those who prefer to deny the truth and defend the lie.
Did manipulation of the secrecy law damage the investigation into Madeleine's disappearance? I fear so.
Did manipulation of the secrecy law damage her parents and their campaign on her behalf? I fear so.
See my earlier post. Go have a chat with the Investigating Judge. Until then you are whistling in the wind with, effectively :
"My dad knows a bloke in the next village who lives next door to a woman who cleans for the guy who delivers the mail, so I should know".
-
See my earlier post. Go have a chat with the Investigating Judge. Until then you are whistling in the wind with, effectively :
"My dad knows a bloke in the next village who lives next door to a woman who cleans for the guy who delivers the mail, so I should know".
I've read Leveson ... did you?
-
To be blunt, I find the part that I have bolded offensive.
Kindly stop introducing an idea, then when I comment on YOUR post, criticise me for deflecting.
Northampton Town sums it up.
Northampton town like Casa Pia before it illustrates the evils possible in a society consisting of many deniers of the possibility.
-
The last two sentences are purely your opinion Brietta, and there is no evidence to back it up.
What also of the leaks to the press by close friends of the Mccann's ?
Goodness gracious, Stephen. Are you suggesting that what was said under oath during the Leveson inquiry is not evidence?
Quote
JOSE MANUEL OLIVEIRA
Crime reporter, 'Diario de Noticias'
Information started circulating from sources connected to the Portuguese police that the story was full of holes from the side of the McCanns and their friends. Indeed within two days of Madeleine disappearing, this crime correspondent was filing this piece in the Portuguese Daily: Diario of the Noticias: "Headline: a badly told story." We started to receive information according to which the police suspected the theory they had apprehensions, didn't believe the theory that she had been kidnapped. To conclude, the police started to suspect the parents from the word go.
RECORDED FROM TRANSMISSION: BBC ONE
DATE: 19:11:07
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/panorama/7106086.stm
-
Goodness gracious, Stephen. Are you suggesting that what was said under oath during the Leveson inquiry is not evidence?
Quote
JOSE MANUEL OLIVEIRA
Crime reporter, 'Diario de Noticias'
Information started circulating from sources connected to the Portuguese police that the story was full of holes from the side of the McCanns and their friends. Indeed within two days of Madeleine disappearing, this crime correspondent was filing this piece in the Portuguese Daily: Diario of the Noticias: "Headline: a badly told story." We started to receive information according to which the police suspected the theory they had apprehensions, didn't believe the theory that she had been kidnapped. To conclude, the police started to suspect the parents from the word go.
RECORDED FROM TRANSMISSION: BBC ONE
DATE: 19:11:07
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/panorama/7106086.stm
Do you actually believe everyone tells the truth at inquiries. @)(++(* @)(++(*
-
In evidence Pilditch mentions 'senior officers' ... with respect, I think he will know rather more about who was leaking information and misinformation than you.
There was none of Madeleine's DNA found in the hire car. That is a fact. Just as it is a fact the investigation was leaking like a sieve.
Everyone in Luz who could, appeared to be intent on totally disregarding the secrecy laws ~ so why should it surprise you that a translator should not be exempt from leaping on the band wagon?
Who better than one who may translate on occasion for the police?
Quote
Thus it is that like almost everything else being broadcast and published beyond Portugal's borders about the hunt for Madeleine, the claim that the police want to read Kate's diary has reached its audience via Hugo Beaty's bar.
Every day there starts the same way shortly after it opens at 9am, with an informal briefing to the foreign Press by a locally resident British woman who normally makes a meagre living acting as an occasional interpreter – for the Policia Judiciaria.
Every morning, the woman – who asked me not to publish her name – goes through the Portuguese tabloids and translates their ever-more febrile articles.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-482007/Lies-beatings-secret-trials-dark-police-handling-Madeleine-case.html#ixzz4pH2xTS1s
Piditch was quite clear. He was told by Portuguese journalists that they were in daily contact with senior officers in the investigation. He knew nothing more or he would have told the inquiry. He relied on Portuguese journalists to tell him the truth. That does not mean they did tell him the truth. Therefore that does not make it a fact that the PJ leaked. The only fact is that Portuguese journalists said the PJ leaked.
-
Do you actually believe everyone tells the truth at inquiries. @)(++(* @)(++(*
Perhaps where you are coming from the expectation for those testifying under oath is different from the expectation of those where I am coming from.
-
Perhaps where you are coming from the expectation for those testifying under oath is different from the expectation of those where I am coming from.
I didn't think you were that naive Brietta.
I have seen people lie until they are blue in the face, even when presented with their actual lies.
Have you ever watched court cases where people are under oath and still lie ?
Jury duty was quite an experience as regards that.
For some, an oath is meaningless.
-
Perhaps where you are coming from the expectation for those testifying under oath is different from the expectation of those where I am coming from.
Touchee Brietta 8((()*/
-
Touchee Brietta 8((()*/
Hardly.
-
Yet again.
Posters are reminded to follow forum rules.
-
I've read Leveson ... did you?
Yes and have quoted from it on this very forum.
-
Yes and have quoted from it on this very forum.
I think the evidence presented to Leveson makes clear that Kate and Gerry McCann were not best served by the newspaper reports copied from various Portuguese sources and printed in the British press.
Of far more importance is how it all impinged on Madeleine.
Being declared dead without a hair of her head being found to indicate any suggestion let alone proof of that, could not be considered helpful; especially to encouraging the continuation of an active search for a child who might well be alive.
Has it never occurred to sceptics that after the intensive questioning and investigation carried out by the Portuguese police on them that they were not arrested and charged with an offence?
Instead their arguido status was lifted and in their report the Public Prosecutors put on record that there are no indications of the practise of any crime with regards to Kate and Gerry McCann and Robert Murat.
-
I think the evidence presented to Leveson makes clear that Kate and Gerry McCann were not best served by the newspaper reports copied from various Portuguese sources and printed in the British press.
Of far more importance is how it all impinged on Madeleine.
Being declared dead without a hair of her head being found to indicate any suggestion let alone proof of that, could not be considered helpful; especially to encouraging the continuation of an active search for a child who might well be alive.
Has it never occurred to sceptics that after the intensive questioning and investigation carried out by the Portuguese police on them that they were not arrested and charged with an offence?
Instead their arguido status was lifted and in their report the Public Prosecutors put on record that there are no indications of the practise of any crime with regards to Kate and Gerry McCann and Robert Murat.
The McCanns chose to interact with the UK media in pursuit of their own ends. They wanted the media reports to be supportive. Once they were under scrutiny by the PJ the media coverage became more about them than their missing daughter. Dancing with the devil is always risky.
There was no intensive questioning of the couple. Over five months Kate was interviewed twice as a witness and once as an arguida. Gerry three times as a witness and once as an arguido. Kate's friends were interviewed more intensively and more often than she was.
The fact that there was no evidence to show the arguidos had committed a crime doesn't mean they didn't. It means there was no evidence. There were clearly suspicions which were not allayed;
there were certain points in the arguidos' and witnesses' statements that revealed, apparently at least, contradiction or that lacked physical confirmation.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm
The reconstitution could have allowed the authorities to;
dismiss once and for all any doubts that may subsist concerning the innocence of the missing [child's] parents.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm
As it didn't take place,
said facts remain unclarified.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm
-
The McCanns chose to interact with the UK media in pursuit of their own ends. They wanted the media reports to be supportive. Once they were under scrutiny by the PJ the media coverage became more about them than their missing daughter. Dancing with the devil is always risky.
There was no intensive questioning of the couple. Over five months Kate was interviewed twice as a witness and once as an arguida. Gerry three times as a witness and once as an arguido. Kate's friends were interviewed more intensively and more often than she was.
The fact that there was no evidence to show the arguidos had committed a crime doesn't mean they didn't. It means there was no evidence. There were clearly suspicions which were not allayed;
there were certain points in the arguidos' and witnesses' statements that revealed, apparently at least, contradiction or that lacked physical confirmation.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm
The reconstitution could have allowed the authorities to;
dismiss once and for all any doubts that may subsist concerning the innocence of the missing [child's] parents.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm
As it didn't take place,
said facts remain unclarified.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm
All you have to do now is explain how a recon could prove anything at all except that it isn't humanly possible for 10 people to recreate all their movements between the hours of 5.30 and 11.00p.m from a day a year previous in an accurate enough manner - timewise - to be of any use whatsoever.
IMO it can't be done, but if anyone knows differently I would love to hear their explanation.
I would also like to know what 'demonstrate their innocence' means re the McCanns. Their innocence of what?
-
All you have to do now is explain how a recon could prove anything at all except that it isn't humanly possible for 10 people to recreate all their movements between the hours of 5.30 and 11.00p.m from a day a
year previous in an accurate enough manner - timewise - to be of any use whatsoever.
IMO it can't be done, but if anyone knows differently I would love to hear their explanation.
I would also like to know what 'demonstrate their innocence' means re the McCanns. Their innocence of what?
It seems the Met and the BBC had no hesitation in 2013, six years after the event;
The dramatic Madeleine McCann Crimewatch appeal featured what investigators have described as "the most detailed reconstruction of the case yet".
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-crimewatch-appeal-watch-2372789
It wasn't detailed, of course, and contained errors.
I think you need to ask the prosecutors to answer your second question. All I pointed out was that suspicions were not allayed.
-
I think the evidence presented to Leveson makes clear that Kate and Gerry McCann were not best served by the newspaper reports copied from various Portuguese sources and printed in the British press.
Of far more importance is how it all impinged on Madeleine.
Being declared dead without a hair of her head being found to indicate any suggestion let alone proof of that, could not be considered helpful; especially to encouraging the continuation of an active search for a child who might well be alive.
Has it never occurred to sceptics that after the intensive questioning and investigation carried out by the Portuguese police on them that they were not arrested and charged with an offence?
Instead their arguido status was lifted and in their report the Public Prosecutors put on record that there are no indications of the practise of any crime with regards to Kate and Gerry McCann and Robert Murat.
You would appear to be wandering off the original track.
The bit in bold had not escaped my attention. As to what sceptics think I haven't a clue; try asking one.
To correct your last sentence. The case was filed because during the investigation sufficient evidence was not gathered to show that either the crime occured or the identity of its perpetrator. I am sure you will appreciate the difference.
-
It seems the Met and the BBC had no hesitation in 2013, six years after the event;
The dramatic Madeleine McCann Crimewatch appeal featured what investigators have described as "the most detailed reconstruction of the case yet".
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-crimewatch-appeal-watch-2372789
It wasn't detailed, of course, and contained errors.
I think you need to ask the prosecutors to answer your second question. All I pointed out was that suspicions were not allayed.
There is absolutely no comparison between that 'recon' and the recon the PJ were proposing. But I'm sure you know that G.
Sceptics are very keen to condemn the McCanns and their friends for not agreeing to do the recon, but never offer any explanation as to how the major problem of no-one remembering the exact times they did anything between the hours of 5.30 and 11.00 could possibly be overcome. IMO there is no way it could be overcome and without that crucial knowledge the whole exercise was doomed to failure from the onset. It would have been a shambles.
The same goes for the 'failure to demonstrate their innocence' comment. Sceptics are keen to bring it up - but never offer an explanation as to what it actually means.
AIMHO
-
You would appear to be wandering off the original track.
The bit in bold had not escaped my attention. As to what sceptics think I haven't a clue; try asking one.
To correct your last sentence. The case was filed because during the investigation sufficient evidence was not gathered to show that either the crime occured or the identity of its perpetrator. I am sure you will appreciate the difference.
Now, mention of the case being filed and therefore archived, the archiving document to which we have access raises a question.
Where is the translation of section B - Detailed Analysis?
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm
-
The McCanns chose to interact with the UK media in pursuit of their own ends. They wanted the media reports to be supportive. Once they were under scrutiny by the PJ the media coverage became more about them than their missing daughter. Dancing with the devil is always risky.
There was no intensive questioning of the couple. Over five months Kate was interviewed twice as a witness and once as an arguida. Gerry three times as a witness and once as an arguido. Kate's friends were interviewed more intensively and more often than she was.
The fact that there was no evidence to show the arguidos had committed a crime doesn't mean they didn't. It means there was no evidence. There were clearly suspicions which were not allayed;
there were certain points in the arguidos' and witnesses' statements that revealed, apparently at least, contradiction or that lacked physical confirmation.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm
The reconstitution could have allowed the authorities to;
dismiss once and for all any doubts that may subsist concerning the innocence of the missing [child's] parents.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm
As it didn't take place,
said facts remain unclarified.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm
"The McCanns chose to interact with the UK media in pursuit of their own ends." is merely in your opinion. I do wish you would remember to state that when voicing it.
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_-_MVCBryU6w/SmRkdOE9afI/AAAAAAAADgA/ScYPCEFaLs8/w1200-h630-p-k-no-nu/McCannfiles+19-7-09.jpg)
My opinion is that they used the media to do what the media does best ... that is disseminate information ... the reason the McCanns interacted with the media was to get the word out there regarding their missing child.
Why do you criticise them for that?
-
There is absolutely no comparison between that 'recon' and the recon the PJ were proposing. But I'm sure you know that G.
Sceptics are very keen to condemn the McCanns and their friends for not agreeing to do the recon, but never offer any explanation as to how the major problem of no-one remembering the exact times they did anything between the hours of 5.30 and 11.00 could possibly be overcome. IMO there is no way it could be overcome and without that crucial knowledge the whole exercise was doomed to failure from the onset. It would have been a shambles.
The same goes for the 'failure to demonstrate their innocence' comment. Sceptics are keen to bring it up - but never offer an explanation as to what it actually means.
AIMHO
The Crimewatch reconstruction definitely bore no resemblance to the reconstruction proposed by the PJ. The Crimewatch one was a mere sketch with very little detail. The PJ proposed that the group acted out what they said they did in real time. Correct times could have been identified. For example;
The men left the beach between 18.13 and 18.36. What time would they arrive at the Tapas reception? We now have an almost correct time.
The women left the beach shortly after 18.36. What time would they arrive at the Tapas reception? We now have an almost correct time.
And so on...........not all the answers, but nearer than when different statements are compared.
I never mentioned demonstrating innocence. I mentioned unallayed suspicions which remained at the time of archiving and remain still.
-
Now, mention of the case being filed and therefore archived, the archiving document to which we have access raises a question.
Where is the translation of section B - Detailed Analysis?
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm
Who knows?
But wherever it is one thing is certain, because it is part of the process:
The decision to file the case does not examine the merits of the proceedings to date.
It might help to determine the definition of "File" in this particular instance.
Sort out the process, what means what, take less notice of The Sun and more of authoritative documents and less time will be wasted looking for Reds under the bed and grasping the wrong end of the stick.
-
Now, mention of the case being filed and therefore archived, the archiving document to which we have access raises a question.
Where is the translation of section B - Detailed Analysis?
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm
"B - Detailed Analysis
[this section to be completed soon]" Maybe it was never released hence not translated. Is there evidence it has been ever released?
-
The Crimewatch reconstruction definitely bore no resemblance to the reconstruction proposed by the PJ. The Crimewatch one was a mere sketch with very little detail. The PJ proposed that the group acted out what they said they did in real time. Correct times could have been identified. For example;
The men left the beach between 18.13 and 18.36. What time would they arrive at the Tapas reception? We now have an almost correct time.
The women left the beach shortly after 18.36. What time would they arrive at the Tapas reception? We now have an almost correct time.
And so on...........not all the answers, but nearer than when different statements are compared.
I never mentioned demonstrating innocence. I mentioned unallayed suspicions which remained at the time of archiving and remain still.
What a pity the PJ didn't ask the Tapas receptionist, who was on duty until 7pm, about her recollections of the groups' comings & goings after 5pm.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LUISA_COUTINHO.htm
-
"B - Detailed Analysis
[this section to be completed soon]" Maybe it was never released hence not translated. Is there evidence it has been ever released?
I believe there may be. Perhaps in 2013?
-
What a pity the PJ didn't ask the Tapas receptionist, who was on duty until 7pm, about her recollections of the groups' comings & goings after 5pm.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LUISA_COUTINHO.htm
Looking at the statement by Vitor (Head of the reception staff) there seems a very similar section of wording used in both statements
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LUISA_COUTINHO.htm
"In this concrete case the reasonable option was the Tapas as the distance was only 40 metres from the accommodation as opposed to 200 m from the Millenium."
Compared to Vitor:
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/VITOR-SANTOS.htm
"In this case in concrete, the rational choice for dinner would be the Tapas restaurant as it is 100 metres distance from the apartment, whilst the Millenium is situated 600 metres away."
Luisa has definitely got her distances all wrong but the total structure of the sentence and effect suggests these two had a conversation prior to giving evidence.
Vitor gave his statement on the 7th and Luisa on the 8th.
-
What a pity the PJ didn't ask the Tapas receptionist, who was on duty until 7pm, about her recollections of the groups' comings & goings after 5pm.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LUISA_COUTINHO.htm
It would indeed have helped, as would more searching questions to the other Tapas staff, but that's not what we're discussing is it?
-
It would indeed have helped, as would more searching questions to the other Tapas staff, but that's not what we're discussing is it?
Sorry, but what are we discussing, exactly?
You previously said:-
"The Crimewatch reconstruction definitely bore no resemblance to the reconstruction proposed by the PJ. The Crimewatch one was a mere sketch with very little detail. The PJ proposed that the group acted out what they said they did in real time. Correct times could have been identified. For example;
The men left the beach between 18.13 and 18.36. What time would they arrive at the Tapas reception? We now have an almost correct time.
The women left the beach shortly after 18.36. What time would they arrive at the Tapas reception? We now have an almost correct time.
And so on...........not all the answers, but nearer than when different statements are compared.
I never mentioned demonstrating innocence. I mentioned unallayed suspicions which remained at the time of archiving and remain still."
The movements of the group between 5.30 & 7.30pm ish could have been independently verified by other guests playing tennis & those in the bar & restaurant who may well have been wearing wristw..ches. Likewise, between 8.30pm & 10pm - surely the bar wasn't empty, even if the restaurant was?
Quite why only the Tapas 9's descriptions of their movements provide unallayed suspicion without reference to other witness statements is beyond me - but maybe the PJ just didn't bother with the finer detail because they already decided whodunit.
-
The McCanns chose to interact with the UK media in pursuit of their own ends. They wanted the media reports to be supportive. Once they were under scrutiny by the PJ the media coverage became more about them than their missing daughter. Dancing with the devil is always risky.
There was no intensive questioning of the couple. Over five months Kate was interviewed twice as a witness and once as an arguida. Gerry three times as a witness and once as an arguido. Kate's friends were interviewed more intensively and more often than she was.
The fact that there was no evidence to show the arguidos had committed a crime doesn't mean they didn't. It means there was no evidence. There were clearly suspicions which were not allayed;
there were certain points in the arguidos' and witnesses' statements that revealed, apparently at least, contradiction or that lacked physical confirmation.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm
The reconstitution could have allowed the authorities to;
dismiss once and for all any doubts that may subsist concerning the innocence of the missing [child's] parents.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm
As it didn't take place,
said facts remain unclarified.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm
As you say there was no evuidence that the Mccanns committed a crime, but suspiciions on Amarals and senior officers part, it seems.
Such a pity that Amaral did not allow a reconstruction at the time to enable The Mccanns to have those suspicions lifted off their shoulders and prove their innocence of any crime.
But Amaral said that such a reconstruction was not possible because of the media and public interest. That seemed a weak excuse to me
AIMHO
-
It seems the Met and the BBC had no hesitation in 2013, six years after the event;
The dramatic Madeleine McCann Crimewatch appeal featured what investigators have described as "the most detailed reconstruction of the case yet".
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-crimewatch-appeal-watch-2372789
It wasn't detailed, of course, and contained errors.
I think you need to ask the prosecutors to answer your second question. All I pointed out was that suspicions were not allayed.
I think that the Crimewatch video illustrates exactly what Benice was saying. Gerry and Jane rememberd were Gerry and Jez stood talking differently and had a minor spat.
Things get mixed up with time ...and traumatic events can cause the mind to get befuudled and memory loss
-
Looking at the statement by Vitor (Head of the reception staff) there seems a very similar section of wording used in both statements
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LUISA_COUTINHO.htm
"In this concrete case the reasonable option was the Tapas as the distance was only 40 metres from the accommodation as opposed to 200 m from the Millenium."
Compared to Vitor:
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/VITOR-SANTOS.htm
"In this case in concrete, the rational choice for dinner would be the Tapas restaurant as it is 100 metres distance from the apartment, whilst the Millenium is situated 600 metres away."
Luisa has definitely got her distances all wrong but the total structure of the sentence and effect suggests these two had a conversation prior to giving evidence.
Vitor gave his statement on the 7th and Luisa on the 8th.
Both statements were recorded by the same Inspector, Hugo Silva, which would explain the similar sentence structure.
-
I think the McCann case is a prime example of enduring "fake news". It all began as a result of judicial secrecy creating a vacuum in which as suspicion of the McCanns was encouraged became filled with all sorts of tales of innuendo and downright lies.
Misinformation about the McCanns was not only tolerated, it was encouraged. It has also stood the test of time with normally sensible people who would spot a con if not immediately but eventually and be outraged by it, still discussing clones and the arrangement of the pixels in the last photograph ten years down the line.
All the while studiously avoiding all the inconvenient facts which indicate without a doubt the inaccuracy of the core belief of McCann culpability.
Quote
It should be mentioned in passing that this case illustrates in an exuberant and paradigmatic way,
the long known risks and disadvantages that arise from “trial by newspapers”, which are not “fair
trials”, the “verdicts” of which lead, at times, to distort directly or indirectly, the course of the
investigation and have an effect of detracting attention and even assume, in certain sectors, aspects
of a global media orgy and anticipated blame of the those involved in the case as arguidos, with
disrespect for the persons’ dignity, including that of the missing girl herself.
As Professor Jorge de Figueiredo Dias commented in “Penal Process Law!, Volume 1, Coimbra
Editora, 1974 p.227 and following “This represents a violation of the most basic principles in our
penal law, by substituting the legal trial by court, the due process of law, by an absolutely illegal
and unconstitutional trial by newspaper. And it is a sociologically proven fact that the excess of
publicity of the penal process can even contribute to the creation of an informal system of “penal
justice without judgement” where it is clear, irreparable damage is done to the presumption of
innocence of the arguido and their fundamental guarantees.”
http://genreith.de/pj-archiving-2008.pdf
Might statements like that contained within it, explain why B-Detailed analysis was not translated into English at the same time as the rest of the document?
-
Quote
The disappearance of the British girl, under the circumstances mentioned previously, implied the
involvement of the most diverse entities, especially the intervention of the PJ, which was joined by
other police authorities. In parallel, this disappearance drew the unprecedented attention of the
national and international media, with particular emphasis in the UK during the following days in
their peak hour news bulletins, with live reporting from Praia da Luz, as well as programmes
specially dedicated to the issue.
Meanwhile, the girl’s parents dedicated themselves to making the most diverse contacts and
appeals, divulging images of Madeleine, whilst the British authorities opened a permanent and
specialised contact line in order to gather information regarding the disappearance, in addition to
information from Interpol and other police partners.
This activity (divulgation), as well as the informative aspects coming from the media, aimed to
obtain, within the shortest possible period of time, information that would help the investigation in
two ways: finding Madeleine alive and the compilation of material concerning the concrete
circumstances of her disappearance.
http://genreith.de/pj-archiving-2008.pdf
This one part of the archiving document document presents many aspects which differ fundamentally from the perceived wisdom which has become part and parcel of the narrative.
I am left with the thought; "the narrative according to who ... and the narrative to what end?"
On reading the above what I am missing is the 'outrage against publicity'. The prosecutors seem to be perfectly at ease with its use from start to finish. Recognising the value of publicity in the case of a missing child and speaking well of the parents' role in raising that awareness.
Why have we been told otherwise and Portugal portrayed as a backwater as a result? ... I believe the above comment proves we have been misinformed.
-
On an internet forum Paulo Reis was asked if there was an index accompanying the files on DVD, which he as a journalist had been given after Madeleine's case was archived and if so, would he be able to publish the content.
Quoting the Portuguese Penal Code; Paolo Reis explained he was unable to reproduce anything from the DVD unless it was as a precis in his own words or he risked two years imprisonment.
I've never understood why no-one among those responsible for internet publishing a substantial amount of information covered by the same legislation, did so with impunity ... it is not as if they were not easy enough to find.
Internet detectives have had a field day invading the privacy of everyone mentioned in the illegally published material. Clearly that should not have happened ... but it did ... doesn't the fact there was no penalty make a bit of a mockery of a law that apparently cannot be enforced when it suits?
-
On an internet forum Paulo Reis was asked if there was an index accompanying the files on DVD, which he as a journalist had been given after Madeleine's case was archived and if so, would he be able to publish the content.
Quoting the Portuguese Penal Code; Paolo Reis explained he was unable to reproduce anything from the DVD unless it was as a precis in his own words or he risked two years imprisonment.
I've never understood why no-one among those responsible for internet publishing a substantial amount of information covered by the same legislation, did so with impunity ... it is not as if they were not easy enough to find.
Internet detectives have had a field day invading the privacy of everyone mentioned in the illegally published material. Clearly that should not have happened ... but it did ... doesn't the fact there was no penalty make a bit of a mockery of a law that apparently cannot be enforced when it suits?
Invading the privacy ... ?
Is there some particular reason why you think journalists should have access to private details if the general public are to be denied?
If you consider laws have been breached, you have the option of reporting it to the authorities. Somewhat akin to the report-to-moderator button.
-
Invading the privacy ... ?
Is there some particular reason why you think journalists should have access to private details if the general public are to be denied?
If you consider laws have been breached, you have the option of reporting it to the authorities. Somewhat akin to the report-to-moderator button.
Why do you think the Portuguese authorities would take any action over private details appearing on the internet when the authorised recipient of such data did not personally upload it from within Portugal?
-
Invading the privacy ... ?
Is there some particular reason why you think journalists should have access to private details if the general public are to be denied?
If you consider laws have been breached, you have the option of reporting it to the authorities. Somewhat akin to the report-to-moderator button.
It is the way in which the Portuguese system is set up.
Very possibly as a reaction to citizens having to live under an unaccountable fascist regime the new democracy went for as much openness as was humanly possible.
You know the thing ... no more being removed from a prison in the middle of the night to hazardous areas where one could run the risk of a tumble downstairs.
Was the secrecy law part and parcel of that? Dunno, but to me it has turned out to epitomise the exact opposite of the openness and fairness it might have intended, with far too many opportunities to enable abuse by corrupt, manipulative people.
Part of the intended openness I believe was for those with an interest in the court case to have access to all the documentation available. This was inclusive of journalists.
This was allowed under the penal code which was well understood. For example, as explained by Paolo Reis.
I do not know of any cases where the law has been breached as it has been in Madeleine McCann's case.
Please don't be silly and ask me what I think about the law as it applies in Portugal ... that is for those to whom it applies.
Please desist from from asking me to complain about Portuguese laws being broken ... I think last time your criticism was along the lines I pop into Portimao and ask for my own copy of whatever.
It is a fact the Portuguese secrecy law has been flouted ... it appears to be a fact that no action has been taken against those who chose to do that. Unless you know different.
So please try to get over this apparent 'thing' you have about a lot of what I post which compels your attempt at put down. You are actually not very good at it. It lends absolutely nothing to the debate - no caveat ... that is a fact. Try to address the content of what I am posting not just your general irritation.
Just look at what you have written above.
Have you addressed my post? I don't think so.
Have you attacked me? I think so. Please desist. It is becoming far too predictable and tiresome.
-
It is the way in which the Portuguese system is set up.
Very possibly as a reaction to citizens having to live under an unaccountable fascist regime the new democracy went for as much openness as was humanly possible.
You know the thing ... no more being removed from a prison in the middle of the night to hazardous areas where one could run the risk of a tumble downstairs.
Was the secrecy law part and parcel of that? Dunno, but to me it has turned out to epitomise the exact opposite of the openness and fairness it might have intended, with far too many opportunities to enable abuse by corrupt, manipulative people.
Part of the intended openness I believe was for those with an interest in the court case to have access to all the documentation available. This was inclusive of journalists.
This was allowed under the penal code which was well understood. For example, as explained by Paolo Reis.
I do not know of any cases where the law has been breached as it has been in Madeleine McCann's case.
Please don't be silly and ask me what I think about the law as it applies in Portugal ... that is for those to whom it applies.
Please desist from from asking me to complain about Portuguese laws being broken ... I think last time your criticism was along the lines I pop into Portimao and ask for my own copy of whatever.
It is a fact the Portuguese secrecy law has been flouted ... it appears to be a fact that no action has been taken against those who chose to do that. Unless you know different.
So please try to get over this apparent 'thing' you have about a lot of what I post which compels your attempt at put down. You are actually not very good at it. It lends absolutely nothing to the debate - no caveat ... that is a fact. Try to address the content of what I am posting not just your general irritation.
Just look at what you have written above.
Have you addressed my post? I don't think so.
Have you attacked me? I think so. Please desist. It is becoming far too predictable and tiresome.
I haven't got a clue what you are ranting about.
If you think I have breached the forum rules then MODERATE, because that is what MODERATORS do.
In the absence of this, perhaps you would be kind enough to stop trying to impose your purely personal views on me.
This is the 4th or 5th recent occurrence where YOU have raised a point, then failed to provide a cite, failed to label it IYO, then chosen to try to castigate me for querying its content.
This is not the Brietta Broadcasting Community. It is the UK Justice Forum.
-
I haven't got a clue what you are ranting about.
I you think I have breached the forum rules then MODERATE, because that is what MODERATORS do.
In the absence of this, perhaps you would be kind enough to stop trying to impose your purely personal views on me.
This is the 4th or 5th recent occurrence where YOU have raised a point, then failed to provide a cite, failed to label it IYO, then chosen to try to castigate me for querying its content.
This is not the Brietta Broadcasting Community. It is the UK Justice Forum.
In the main moderator privileges are not used as a debating tool on this forum where mods enjoy the great advantage of being allowed to enter into the debate with the other members.
For that reason I shall desist from attempting any future discussion with you ... which I think is terribly sad on a discussion forum.
Nor will I moderate any response you may choose to make to any of my future posts, I will report any I think may breach forum rules for other mods to decide.
I shall of course continue to moderate your general comments to others and those in discussions in which I am not involved.
-
On an internet forum Paulo Reis was asked if there was an index accompanying the files on DVD, which he as a journalist had been given after Madeleine's case was archived and if so, would he be able to publish the content.
Quoting the Portuguese Penal Code; Paolo Reis explained he was unable to reproduce anything from the DVD unless it was as a precis in his own words or he risked two years imprisonment.
I've never understood why no-one among those responsible for internet publishing a substantial amount of information covered by the same legislation, did so with impunity ... it is not as if they were not easy enough to find.
Internet detectives have had a field day invading the privacy of everyone mentioned in the illegally published material. Clearly that should not have happened ... but it did ... doesn't the fact there was no penalty make a bit of a mockery of a law that apparently cannot be enforced when it suits?
Really? No-one was penalised for posting downloadable copies of the Amaral and McCann books either. The reason in all these cases is probably the same; the difficulties of prosecuting people from another country.
-
Both statements were recorded by the same Inspector, Hugo Silva, which would explain the similar sentence structure.
So is the inspector putting words down that are not actually said by the witness?
-
I think the McCann case is a prime example of enduring "fake news". It all began as a result of judicial secrecy creating a vacuum in which as suspicion of the McCanns was encouraged became filled with all sorts of tales of innuendo and downright lies.
Misinformation about the McCanns was not only tolerated, it was encouraged. It has also stood the test of time with normally sensible people who would spot a con if not immediately but eventually and be outraged by it, still discussing clones and the arrangement of the pixels in the last photograph ten years down the line.
All the while studiously avoiding all the inconvenient facts which indicate without a doubt the inaccuracy of the core belief of McCann culpability.
Quote
It should be mentioned in passing that this case illustrates in an exuberant and paradigmatic way,
the long known risks and disadvantages that arise from “trial by newspapers”, which are not “fair
trials”, the “verdicts” of which lead, at times, to distort directly or indirectly, the course of the
investigation and have an effect of detracting attention and even assume, in certain sectors, aspects
of a global media orgy and anticipated blame of the those involved in the case as arguidos, with
disrespect for the persons’ dignity, including that of the missing girl herself.
As Professor Jorge de Figueiredo Dias commented in “Penal Process Law!, Volume 1, Coimbra
Editora, 1974 p.227 and following “This represents a violation of the most basic principles in our
penal law, by substituting the legal trial by court, the due process of law, by an absolutely illegal
and unconstitutional trial by newspaper. And it is a sociologically proven fact that the excess of
publicity of the penal process can even contribute to the creation of an informal system of “penal
justice without judgement” where it is clear, irreparable damage is done to the presumption of
innocence of the arguido and their fundamental guarantees.”
http://genreith.de/pj-archiving-2008.pdf
Might statements like that contained within it, explain why B-Detailed analysis was not translated into English at the same time as the rest of the document?
Was the B-Detailed analysis ever released at the same time as the file?
-
Really? No-one was penalised for posting downloadable copies of the Amaral and McCann books either. The reason in all these cases is probably the same; the difficulties of prosecuting people from another country.
The individual authors or their publishers of the books you choose as an example had their intellectual property stolen by whoever broke copyright law when uploading and sharing them on the internet with others.
Breach of the Portuguese penal code is an offence against the Portuguese State and its people. I would imagine a State would have more resources to protect the law of the land than an individual author might be able to command in an action to protect copyright.
However ... enough petty bickering.
Does anyone have any idea why Part B of the Archiving dispatch was left out of the first round of translation and put off till later.
I have suggested areas where it ties in with the secrecy laws which constrained Madeleine's parents which led to the mistaken belief they were hiding something.
No takers?
-
So is the inspector putting words down that are not actually said by the witness?
I would say absolutely yes...imo
The McCann statements are also very similar
It seems as though the questioner asked a specific question and if the answer was yes then recorded the statement as though the witness had actually said those words
-
Was the B-Detailed analysis ever released at the same time as the file?
It is part and parcel of the Archiving Dispatch ... it just was not translated into English when everything else was.
Why would that be?
-
It is part and parcel of the Archiving Dispatch ... it just was not translated into English when everything else was.
Why would that be?
The translations I see are on a site "The McCann files" If that site was against the McCanns maybe it was withheld from translation as it didn't suit the owner to publish it at the time.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TRANSLATIONS.htm Just because the site is called the McCann files it doesn't imply they are run by the McCanns.
-
The individual authors or their publishers of the books you choose as an example had their intellectual property stolen by whoever broke copyright law when uploading and sharing them on the internet with others.
Breach of the Portuguese penal code is an offence against the Portuguese State and its people. I would imagine a State would have more resources to protect the law of the land than an individual author might be able to command in an action to protect copyright.
However ... enough petty bickering.
Does anyone have any idea why Part B of the Archiving dispatch was left out of the first round of translation and put off till later.
I have suggested areas where it ties in with the secrecy laws which constrained Madeleine's parents which led to the mistaken belief they were hiding something.
No takers?
There are a variety of reasons why people weren't convinced by the McCann's story.
-
There are a variety of reasons why people weren't convinced by the McCann's story.
And still aren't convinced ten years on. They say that actions speak louder than words which would appear to be very true in this case. Maddie was abandoned to her fate many years ago.
-
There are a variety of reasons why people weren't convinced by the McCann's story.
What about "There are a variety of reasons why people weren't convinced by the Wilkins' story".
http://genreith.de/pj-archiving-2008.pdf
"At 21.10, given her husband’s absence, Jane Tanner went to check on the state of her daughter. She
left by the reception and walked up the road that passes the entrance to the apartment block. She
was not seen by Gerald McCann, nor by Jeremy Wilkins, although she did see them. Gerald had his
back to her, however Wilkins was facing the place where Tanner passed."
If her husband was absent he wasn't actually in their apartment either in my understanding of the events.
-
Was the B-Detailed analysis ever released at the same time as the file?
Is this part of it Brietta? (Scroll down for English)
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/OUSTROS_APENSOS_11_VOLUMES.htm
-
I think the McCann case is a prime example of enduring "fake news". It all began as a result of judicial secrecy creating a vacuum in which as suspicion of the McCanns was encouraged became filled with all sorts of tales of innuendo and downright lies.
Misinformation about the McCanns was not only tolerated, it was encouraged. It has also stood the test of time with normally sensible people who would spot a con if not immediately but eventually and be outraged by it, still discussing clones and the arrangement of the pixels in the last photograph ten years down the line.
All the while studiously avoiding all the inconvenient facts which indicate without a doubt the inaccuracy of the core belief of McCann culpability.
Quote
It should be mentioned in passing that this case illustrates in an exuberant and paradigmatic way,
the long known risks and disadvantages that arise from “trial by newspapers”, which are not “fair
trials”, the “verdicts” of which lead, at times, to distort directly or indirectly, the course of the
investigation and have an effect of detracting attention and even assume, in certain sectors, aspects
of a global media orgy and anticipated blame of the those involved in the case as arguidos, with
disrespect for the persons’ dignity, including that of the missing girl herself.
As Professor Jorge de Figueiredo Dias commented in “Penal Process Law!, Volume 1, Coimbra
Editora, 1974 p.227 and following “This represents a violation of the most basic principles in our
penal law, by substituting the legal trial by court, the due process of law, by an absolutely illegal
and unconstitutional trial by newspaper. And it is a sociologically proven fact that the excess of
publicity of the penal process can even contribute to the creation of an informal system of “penal
justice without judgement” where it is clear, irreparable damage is done to the presumption of
innocence of the arguido and their fundamental guarantees.”
http://genreith.de/pj-archiving-2008.pdf
Might statements like that contained within it, explain why B-Detailed analysis was not translated into English at the same time as the rest of the document?
Do http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm and http://genreith.de/pj-archiving-2008.pdf have the same words?
-
Do http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm and http://genreith.de/pj-archiving-2008.pdf have the same words?
I've not checked every single word but I think both match up although it seems the translators may be different.
-
I've not checked every single word but I think both match up although it seems the translators may be different.
Both reference Astro as the translator. (Quick check only).
-
Both reference Astro as the translator. (Quick check only).
Processos Vol XVII Pages 4599 to 4622
With thanks to Ines
(Part B of the Archiving Dispatch)
B – Concrete Analysis
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm
-
Is this part of it Brietta? (Scroll down for English)
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/OUSTROS_APENSOS_11_VOLUMES.htm
I've not seen that before, Misty.
If I've been on that page before I've not bothered to scroll down as far as the English script. Will need to read it.
-
I've not seen that before, Misty.
If I've been on that page before I've not bothered to scroll down as far as the English script. Will need to read it.
So no mystery then?
-
So no mystery then?
Nah!
This bit was interesting:
NOTE:
This is the second report demanded to a team of independent analysts from the Central Department of Criminal Investigation (Central Division of Information Analysis - PJ), dated from February 2008.
The references to the annexes and pages of the files were kept, just in order to allow anyone to ask for some particular document(s) to be translated ' I would do them ALL if I had the time, but I fear I won't be able to, so I'll be happy to go over those that you consider more interesting, if the request is rationally founded
Also the reference to 3004 pages, which some will have you believe they have read in their entirety.
And another thing! The backwoods hicksville folk were only using US Military Software for the analysis.
-
So no mystery then?
Unless you can tell me why Part B of the Archiving Dispatch was not translated along with the rest of it ... there is still a mystery in my opinion.
I've not read to the end of Misty's link yet ... but it doesn't appear to include the answer to my question.
-
Unless you can tell me why Part B of the Archiving Dispatch was not translated along with the rest of it ... there is still a mystery in my opinion.
I've not read to the end of Misty's link yet ... but it doesn't appear to include the answer to my question.
Could it have just been missed off the to do list?
-
Could it have just been missed off the to do list?
I wouldn't have thought so ... it was noted at the time that it would be translated later ... Quote B - Detailed Analysis [this section to be completed soon]. End Quote
Why would there be a delay isn't explained.
Interestingly the claim is made about those diligences carried out by the Policia Judiciaria when they arrived ...
Quote
Upon being contacted, the PJ’s intervention was immediate, they went to the scene (folios 02 onwards) where they undertook various inquiries aiming to establish the facts, a photographic report was made at the site (folios 12 – 23) as well releasing information about the disappearance, with the photograph and description of the girl, to the authorities as well as to the press, after obtaining authorisation from the Public Ministry (folios 32 – 33b and 459), a fingerprint inspection, which only enabled the collection of finger prints of those persons who had legitimate access to the apartment. The apartment was also examined by the Scientific Police Laboratory, which collected numerous traces and carried out continuous examinations, which did not lead to the full clarification of the events. End quote
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm
Seems to contradict the perceived wisdom just a bit don't you think?
-
I wouldn't have thought so ... it was noted at the time that it would be translated later ... Quote B - Detailed Analysis [this section to be completed soon]. End Quote
Why would there be a delay isn't explained.
Interestingly the claim is made about those diligences carried out by the Policia Judiciaria when they arrived ...
Quote
Upon being contacted, the PJ’s intervention was immediate, they went to the scene (folios 02 onwards) where they undertook various inquiries aiming to establish the facts, a photographic report was made at the site (folios 12 – 23) as well releasing information about the disappearance, with the photograph and description of the girl, to the authorities as well as to the press, after obtaining authorisation from the Public Ministry (folios 32 – 33b and 459), a fingerprint inspection, which only enabled the collection of finger prints of those persons who had legitimate access to the apartment. The apartment was also examined by the Scientific Police Laboratory, which collected numerous traces and carried out continuous examinations, which did not lead to the full clarification of the events. End quote
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm
Seems to contradict the perceived wisdom just a bit don't you think?
But weren't the exact same words translated in the report to Lowe etc.? So it was translated but the translated portion had not been added back in the Archiving Report. It seems more like an oversight rather than anything else.
-
I wouldn't have thought so ... it was noted at the time that it would be translated later ... Quote B - Detailed Analysis [this section to be completed soon]. End Quote
Why would there be a delay isn't explained.
Interestingly the claim is made about those diligences carried out by the Policia Judiciaria when they arrived ...
Quote
Upon being contacted, the PJ’s intervention was immediate, they went to the scene (folios 02 onwards) where they undertook various inquiries aiming to establish the facts, a photographic report was made at the site (folios 12 – 23) as well releasing information about the disappearance, with the photograph and description of the girl, to the authorities as well as to the press, after obtaining authorisation from the Public Ministry (folios 32 – 33b and 459), a fingerprint inspection, which only enabled the collection of finger prints of those persons who had legitimate access to the apartment. The apartment was also examined by the Scientific Police Laboratory, which collected numerous traces and carried out continuous examinations, which did not lead to the full clarification of the events. End quote
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm
Seems to contradict the perceived wisdom just a bit don't you think?
What perceived wisdom is being contradicted?
-
Even if there had been no long term effect on the McCann family ... in the short term the pain caused by the difficulty of being officially gagged while the trial by media was in full cry against them, must have been immense.
In evidence, Kate McCanns told the Leveson inquiry; " ... I know we'll come on to headlines, but "Corpse in the car"; I don't know how many times I read "Body fluids in the car". And it gets repeated that often, it becomes fact. There were no body fluids. We desperately wanted to shout out "It's not true, it's not true"
" We were desperately shouting out internally "Please stop, what are you doing? We're trying to find our daughter and you're stopping our chances of finding her".
The press were free to print whatever calumny sold papers and without the guidance from the police about what might be helpful in finding Madeleine and what might be inappropriate, they ran with whatever snippets of information and misinformation they could find about her parents instead.
They were left unprotected by the authorities from the ensuing maelstrom and left unable to defend themselves as explained by Gerry McCann who expanded on Kate's evidence by adding; "The point being, which I alluded to earlier, is that we were told in no uncertain terms that if we disclosed anything publicly which we knew to be in the judicial file, ie the results which had been shown to us, which we knew were not what was being reported about DNA, then we were threatened with a two-year imprisonment for breaking judicial secrecy, so we were being tried by the media and unable to defend ourselves adequately."
Such a barrage of misinformation is hard to overcome particularly when it is perpetuated in book and social media right up until the present day ... why on earth can that ever be considered acceptable when the truth is to hand?
In my opinion the judicial secrecy law was an impediment to Madeleine's case but was used to benefit the work in progress of a case being made against her parents.
(https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ya8_H2RwUdU/WHF-VWco93I/AAAAAAAAHhA/T7Eg8MBhnlQER82kgXaDYbuRKVRuJ2gagCLcB/s400/gafluids.png)
-
Even if there had been no long term effect on the McCann family ... in the short term the pain caused by the difficulty of being officially gagged while the trial by media was in full cry against them, must have been immense.
In evidence, Kate McCanns told the Leveson inquiry; " ... I know we'll come on to headlines, but "Corpse in the car"; I don't know how many times I read "Body fluids in the car". And it gets repeated that often, it becomes fact. There were no body fluids. We desperately wanted to shout out "It's not true, it's not true"
" We were desperately shouting out internally "Please stop, what are you doing? We're trying to find our daughter and you're stopping our chances of finding her".
The press were free to print whatever calumny sold papers and without the guidance from the police about what might be helpful in finding Madeleine and what might be inappropriate, they ran with whatever snippets of information and misinformation they could find about her parents instead.
They were left unprotected by the authorities from the ensuing maelstrom and left unable to defend themselves as explained by Gerry McCann who expanded on Kate's evidence by adding; "The point being, which I alluded to earlier, is that we were told in no uncertain terms that if we disclosed anything publicly which we knew to be in the judicial file, ie the results which had been shown to us, which we knew were not what was being reported about DNA, then we were threatened with a two-year imprisonment for breaking judicial secrecy, so we were being tried by the media and unable to defend ourselves adequately."
Such a barrage of misinformation is hard to overcome particularly when it is perpetuated in book and social media right up until the present day ... why on earth can that ever be considered acceptable when the truth is to hand?
In my opinion the judicial secrecy law was an impediment to Madeleine's case but was used to benefit the work in progress of a case being made against her parents.
(https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ya8_H2RwUdU/WHF-VWco93I/AAAAAAAAHhA/T7Eg8MBhnlQER82kgXaDYbuRKVRuJ2gagCLcB/s400/gafluids.png)
Portugal has a different legal set-up than the UK which is their prerogative. Portuguese journalists wrote speculative stories with no identifiable sources. British journalists copied them even though they couldn't verify them.
When the British media were challenged about it their defence was that they believed the Portuguese journalists when they said they had official sources. The 'poor journalists' needed stories and neither the PJ nor LP would speak to them so it wasn't their fault, it was caused by the Portuguese judicial secrecy laws. I see that as an excuse, not a reason. They have printed many speculative stories about Operation Grange too, most of which are unconfirmed by the Met., so they have learned nothing.
Leaving aside their reasons, the McCanns decided to involve and use the British media to get their message across. When the stories weren't what they wanted they blamed Judicial secrecy for stopping them from defending themselves. I wonder just what it prevented them from saying? The story of the police offering Kate McCann a 'deal' got out. Did that breach judicial secrecy? It stopped the PJ from responding, apparently;
Due to legal restrictions on police under Portuguese law, they are unable to respond to the claims made by the McCanns.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6985454.stm
-
Portugal has a different legal set-up than the UK which is their prerogative. Portuguese journalists wrote speculative stories with no identifiable sources. British journalists copied them even though they couldn't verify them.
When the British media were challenged about it their defence was that they believed the Portuguese journalists when they said they had official sources. The 'poor journalists' needed stories and neither the PJ nor LP would speak to them so it wasn't their fault, it was caused by the Portuguese judicial secrecy laws. I see that as an excuse, not a reason. They have printed many speculative stories about Operation Grange too, most of which are unconfirmed by the Met., so they have learned nothing.
Leaving aside their reasons, the McCanns decided to involve and use the British media to get their message across. When the stories weren't what they wanted they blamed Judicial secrecy for stopping them from defending themselves. I wonder just what it prevented them from saying? The story of the police offering Kate McCann a 'deal' got out. Did that breach judicial secrecy? It stopped the PJ from responding, apparently;
Due to legal restrictions on police under Portuguese law, they are unable to respond to the claims made by the McCanns.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6985454.stm
Gerry McCann's evidence to Leveson included the differentials between Portuguese and English law and the role of the media in Madeleine's case as a result ... in particular the Portuguese media.
I recommend you read it in its entirety as it rather makes a mockery of your post.
It is horses for courses.
British law is for the Brits.
Portuguese law is for the Portuguese. Both are under constant review and both are subject to constant change as is appropriate in modern democracies. For example the secrecy law won't protect you in Portugal from the taxman.
http://theportugalnews.com/news/taxman-gains-full-bank-account-access/38624
This thread concerns the impact Portuguese secrecy law had on Madeleine McCann's case and I think the published distortions in the Portuguese press really does rub it in that Portuguese secrecy law apparently applies to some more than others.
For example dated at 2007-11-12 Madeleine's case was being openly discussed in Portugal where one would have assumed Portuguese secrecy law might have had some relevance we have ...
Quote
Several friends of the McCanns who were in Praia da Luz when Madeleine disappeared asked to be heard again by the PJ to change the initial testimony. According to information from the newspaper El Mundo , cited by the DN these people asked not to be identified because of the "powerful lobby" surrounding the couple and that "truly frighten anyone," said the lawyer of one of the witnesses.
"My client is forced to be silent, which is what he can do to help the investigation. And I'm not talking about the secrecy that is required by Portuguese law, but the strange circumstances surrounding the case, "said the lawyer.
The caustic adds that his client asked to be heard again and "correct some details and discrepancies" that appeared in the statements made by the nine people in the restaurant that night. "My client does not want to blame or blame anyone, because this is the work of the police. He only wants to clarify the truth and does not care who will be harmed."
http://www.tvi24.iol.pt/sociedade/maddie/divulgada-foto-do-quarto-de-madeleine
Have you ever written a post about "discrepancies"?
Many have ... and continue to do so without being able identify them.
Very much as your post on the McCanns and the media reflects the perceived wisdom (since you asked) of a time when opinions were being formed by all sorts of misinformation; which I would have imagined must have been breaking the law regarding active investigations; at a time when it had been impressed on the victims of the unfounded allegations, they faced two years in a Portuguese jail if they had opened their mouths to defend themselves.
-
There shouldn't have been any secrets in the first place. This was a missing child enquiry and it was expected, in fact demanded, that the parents of said missing child should cooperate fully and totally with the police. I would go further and say that the parents should have been at police headquarters every day urging the police on. This never happened, the parents chose other activities including the well publicised jogging around the town. Does anyone else find this odd?
-
There shouldn't have been any secrets in the first place. This was a missing child enquiry and it was expected, in fact demanded, that the parents of said missing child should cooperate fully and totally with the police. I would go further and say that the parents should have been at police headquarters every day urging the police on. This never happened, the parents chose other activities including the well publicised jogging around the town. Does anyone else find this odd?
There shouldn't have been any secrets in the first place. This was a missing child enquiry and it was expected, in fact demanded, that the parents of said missing child should cooperate fully and totally with the police. I would go further and say that the parents should have been at police headquarters every day urging the police on. This never happened, the parents chose other activities including the well publicised jogging around the town. Does anyone else find this odd?
Would you expect the parents of a missing child in this country be at police headquarters every day to" urge the police on"?
-
Would you expect the parents of a missing child in this country be at police headquarters every day to" urge the police on"?
Without a shadow of a doubt I would expect at least one parent to be very closely involved with the day to day police activities. It seems the only time the McCanns went to the police station was when their attendance was requested. Could it be that they were told to stay away?
-
Without a shadow of a doubt.
Is that normal procedure in this country?
I cannot imagine it is.
To expect the parents to have to urge a police force to look for a missing child.
Really??
-
Without a shadow of a doubt I would expect at least one parent to be very closely involved with the day to day police activities. It seems the only time the McCanns went to the police station was when their attendance was requested. Could it be that they were told to stay away?
They had weekly meetings with the Portuguese police until the dogs' inspection. I think it was in MADELEINE that Kate remarked on the change in attitude which occurred after that.
-
Gerry McCann's evidence to Leveson included the differentials between Portuguese and English law and the role of the media in Madeleine's case as a result ... in particular the Portuguese media.
I recommend you read it in its entirety as it rather makes a mockery of your post.
It is horses for courses.
British law is for the Brits.
Portuguese law is for the Portuguese. Both are under constant review and both are subject to constant change as is appropriate in modern democracies. For example the secrecy law won't protect you in Portugal from the taxman.
http://theportugalnews.com/news/taxman-gains-full-bank-account-access/38624
This thread concerns the impact Portuguese secrecy law had on Madeleine McCann's case and I think the published distortions in the Portuguese press really does rub it in that Portuguese secrecy law apparently applies to some more than others.
For example dated at 2007-11-12 Madeleine's case was being openly discussed in Portugal where one would have assumed Portuguese secrecy law might have had some relevance we have ...
Quote
Several friends of the McCanns who were in Praia da Luz when Madeleine disappeared asked to be heard again by the PJ to change the initial testimony. According to information from the newspaper El Mundo , cited by the DN these people asked not to be identified because of the "powerful lobby" surrounding the couple and that "truly frighten anyone," said the lawyer of one of the witnesses.
"My client is forced to be silent, which is what he can do to help the investigation. And I'm not talking about the secrecy that is required by Portuguese law, but the strange circumstances surrounding the case, "said the lawyer.
The caustic adds that his client asked to be heard again and "correct some details and discrepancies" that appeared in the statements made by the nine people in the restaurant that night. "My client does not want to blame or blame anyone, because this is the work of the police. He only wants to clarify the truth and does not care who will be harmed."
http://www.tvi24.iol.pt/sociedade/maddie/divulgada-foto-do-quarto-de-madeleine
Have you ever written a post about "discrepancies"?
Many have ... and continue to do so without being able identify them.
Very much as your post on the McCanns and the media reflects the perceived wisdom (since you asked) of a time when opinions were being formed by all sorts of misinformation; which I would have imagined must have been breaking the law regarding active investigations; at a time when it had been impressed on the victims of the unfounded allegations, they faced two years in a Portuguese jail if they had opened their mouths to defend themselves.
I'm not sure what your point is, sorry.
If a person is a victim of crime in another country the crime is investigated according to the customs and laws of that country, not the person's country of origin. The media in that country may operate differently than the media in the person's country of origin, but that's their (different) way of working.
Is there any report of the McCanns complaining officially to the Portuguese authorities about the alleged leaks from the PJ?
-
Gerry McCann's evidence to Leveson included the differentials between Portuguese and English law and the role of the media in Madeleine's case as a result ... in particular the Portuguese media.
I recommend you read it in its entirety as it rather makes a mockery of your post.
It is horses for courses.
British law is for the Brits.
Portuguese law is for the Portuguese. Both are under constant review and both are subject to constant change as is appropriate in modern democracies. For example the secrecy law won't protect you in Portugal from the taxman.
http://theportugalnews.com/news/taxman-gains-full-bank-account-access/38624
This thread concerns the impact Portuguese secrecy law had on Madeleine McCann's case and I think the published distortions in the Portuguese press really does rub it in that Portuguese secrecy law apparently applies to some more than others.
For example dated at 2007-11-12 Madeleine's case was being openly discussed in Portugal where one would have assumed Portuguese secrecy law might have had some relevance we have ...
Quote
Several friends of the McCanns who were in Praia da Luz when Madeleine disappeared asked to be heard again by the PJ to change the initial testimony. According to information from the newspaper El Mundo , cited by the DN these people asked not to be identified because of the "powerful lobby" surrounding the couple and that "truly frighten anyone," said the lawyer of one of the witnesses.
"My client is forced to be silent, which is what he can do to help the investigation. And I'm not talking about the secrecy that is required by Portuguese law, but the strange circumstances surrounding the case, "said the lawyer.
The caustic adds that his client asked to be heard again and "correct some details and discrepancies" that appeared in the statements made by the nine people in the restaurant that night. "My client does not want to blame or blame anyone, because this is the work of the police. He only wants to clarify the truth and does not care who will be harmed."
http://www.tvi24.iol.pt/sociedade/maddie/divulgada-foto-do-quarto-de-madeleine
Have you ever written a post about "discrepancies"?
Many have ... and continue to do so without being able identify them.
Very much as your post on the McCanns and the media reflects the perceived wisdom (since you asked) of a time when opinions were being formed by all sorts of misinformation; which I would have imagined must have been breaking the law regarding active investigations; at a time when it had been impressed on the victims of the unfounded allegations, they faced two years in a Portuguese jail if they had opened their mouths to defend themselves.
Bump: Post #19.
-
Would you expect the parents of a missing child in this country be at police headquarters every day to" urge the police on"?
I don't think it would ever be necessary in this country, Erngath ... but things are different in Portugal it would seem.
According to Colin Sutton ...
5 Lack of information released to public from Portuguese police
“There was no publicising the case from the local police, which is unheard of back home.
“The public assistance in a case like Madeleine’s would have been huge because of the emotive subject - a missing three-year-old girl. It defies belief that they did not publish e-fits once they had them.
“Their lack of PR explains why the McCanns were so pro-active on that front. They were trying to fill the vacuum.”
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/6-errors-madeleine-mccann-detectives-10272590
Therefore the McCanns were obliged to fend for themselves in a way unheard of for us in Britain who are used to the police controlling every aspect of an investigation ... in particular if the case involves a missing child.
The McCanns had to play catch up for publicity which the police rightly should have generated in the golden hour.
They felt they had to employ private detectives to carry out investigating what might have happened to their missing child.
Rarely if not unheard of in Britain, because the police do it ... so why is it the McCanns who are on the receiving end of criticism for finding themselves in the situation in Portugal where the police apparently don't?
-
Without a shadow of a doubt I would expect at least one parent to be very closely involved with the day to day police activities. It seems the only time the McCanns went to the police station was when their attendance was requested. Could it be that they were told to stay away?
In the UK the Police Liaison Officer (s) have a very important role. The victims can ring them at any time for information or reassurance. That doesn't mean they always answer the phone or that they will answer your questions in practice, however.
The Portuguese police can cite judicial secrecy to keep people from nagging detectives, the British police can tell people to talk to their Liaison officer. In both cases detectives are protected so they can get on with whatever they are doing.
-
I don't think it would ever be necessary in this country, Erngath ... but things are different in Portugal it would seem.
According to Colin Sutton ...
5 Lack of information released to public from Portuguese police
“There was no publicising the case from the local police, which is unheard of back home.
“The public assistance in a case like Madeleine’s would have been huge because of the emotive subject - a missing three-year-old girl. It defies belief that they did not publish e-fits once they had them.
“Their lack of PR explains why the McCanns were so pro-active on that front. They were trying to fill the vacuum.”
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/6-errors-madeleine-mccann-detectives-10272590
Therefore the McCanns were obliged to fend for themselves in a way unheard of for us in Britain who are used to the police controlling every aspect of an investigation ... in particular if the case involves a missing child.
The McCanns had to play catch up for publicity which the police rightly should have generated in the golden hour.
They felt they had to employ private detectives to carry out investigating what might have happened to their missing child.
Rarely if not unheard of in Britain, because the police do it ... so why is it the McCanns who are on the receiving end of criticism for finding themselves in the situation in Portugal where the police apparently don't?
Of course you are correct.
It would not happen here.
The McCanns were in a foreign country with different laws, different police procedures or lack of the police procedures one would expect here in the case of a missing child.
To be honest the only way to answer your final question is that they, the McCanns are criticized for whatever they do or don't do
.
-
There shouldn't have been any secrets in the first place. This was a missing child enquiry and it was expected, in fact demanded, that the parents of said missing child should cooperate fully and totally with the police. I would go further and say that the parents should have been at police headquarters every day urging the police on. This never happened, the parents chose other activities including the well publicised jogging around the town. Does anyone else find this odd?
They had Family Liaison Officers to do that.
IIRC they were also told to ring the PJ at any time, but whenever they did they were fobbed off and told that everything that could be done was being done.
Why anyone would find their jogging odd I have no idea. Did you expect them to permanently remain cooped up behind closed doors? Jogging is good for you mentally and physically. I would expect those counselling them to encourage exactly that kind of physical exercise.
IMO the PJ would be highly insulted if the impression was given that they required to be checked up on and encouraged to do their job properly on a daily basis by a couple of foreign civilians.
The only time Kate did not co-operate fully was when it became clear that the PJ intended to pin the crime on her. I find it unbelievably odd that anyone would expect her to actively help them to arrest her for a crime that she knew she had not committed. That's just crazy.
AIMHO
-
I'm not sure what your point is, sorry.
If a person is a victim of crime in another country the crime is investigated according to the customs and laws of that country, not the person's country of origin. The media in that country may operate differently than the media in the person's country of origin, but that's their (different) way of working.
Is there any report of the McCanns complaining officially to the Portuguese authorities about the alleged leaks from the PJ?
Portuguese police leaks are 'shameless smears' to discredit us, say McCanns
By VANESSA ALLEN
Last updated at 12:00 12 April 2008
Kate and Gerry McCann yesterday accused Portuguese police of using 'shameless smears' against them.
They demanded a judicial inquiry and called on Portugal's justice minister to hunt down the source who leaked their official police statements to the media.
They want the country's police to investigate how the statements - given in the immediate aftermath of their daughter Madeleine's disappearance on May 3 last year - came to be leaked to a Spanish television channel.
Police in the couple's home county of Leicestershire have been informed and MP Stephen Dorrell called on the Foreign Office to raise the matter with the Portuguese authorities.
Police in Portugal supposedly operate in total secrecy and officers, suspects and even witnesses face jail if they speak out about ongoing investigations.
But behind the scenes, officers have briefed selected journalists with a series of sensationalised claims about the 11-month hunt for Madeleine.
The McCanns have endured wild allegations that they could have drugged their children or even dumped Madeleine's body during a publicity visit to Spain.
But they are especially furious about the timing of the latest leak, which derailed a planned trip to the European Parliament to call for an improved alert system for missing children.
The couple met advisers last night to discuss their response to the leak of the statements - in which it was revealed that Madeleine, then three, and her brother Sean, then two, were left crying in their holiday apartment the night before Madeleine disappeared.
A friend of the family said they would not lash out against the police in public.
'They are furious,' he added. 'They are resigned to the fact that they cannot stop this from happening, but their anger hasn't gone away. It's just that revenge is a dish best served cold.'
Mr McCann's sister Philomena said: 'The person responsible must be tracked down and disciplined for this latest leak.
'Gerry and Kate are yet again being victimised by the Portuguese police in the hope that the information will undermine and discredit them in the public's opinion.
'Publicising information about them is obviously aimed at deflecting attention from the fact that the police have not made any breakthroughs in their investigation.'
The couple's spokesman Clarence Mitchell called for an end to the Portuguese police's series of 'smears' against the McCanns, who remain official suspects.
They have categorically denied any involvement in their daughter's disappearance.
Mr Mitchell said: 'It is brazen, it is shameless, it is cack-handed and it has got to stop.
'The Portuguese government must now get a grip on whatever element it is within the Portuguese police who has been responsible for these leaks, who is apparently doing it with impunity.
'Someone in the police doesn't want Kate and Gerry to widen the agenda for whatever reason.
'We know what they're up to - it's ridiculous and it must stop.'
He said the McCanns accepted they had made a huge mistake when they decided to leave their children alone in their Algarve holiday apartment while they ate dinner nearby with friends.
He said: 'They know that they got it wrong, they made a mistake and, boy, are they paying the price for that - in heartbreak and agony.'
The journalist who broke the story, Spanish crime reporter Nacho Abad, refused to reveal his sources or if the documents had come from a police officer.
But supporters of the McCanns said there were few other people who had access to the statements.
Mr Abad, of broadcaster Telecinco, said the timing of the leak was 'sheer coincidence' and not a deliberate attempt to cloud the McCanns' visit to Brussels.
He said it would be 'appalling' if police resources were wasted hunting for his source when they should be investigating Madeleine's disappearance.
'The McCanns can't be upset,' he added.
'So much speculation and so many lies have surrounded the Madeleine McCann case and we have told the truth.'
The row broke out as chief investigator Paulo Rebelo returned to Portugal for a crunch meeting with the public prosecutor who will decide if the McCanns will remain suspects.
Mr Rebelo had monitored British police interviews of the friends who were with the couple on the night Madeleine vanished - the so-called Tapas Seven.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-559151/Portuguese-police-leaks-shameless-smears-discredit-say-McCanns.html
-
Of course you are correct.
It would not happen here.
The McCanns were in a foreign country with different laws, different police procedures or lack of the police procedures one would expect here in the case of a missing child.
To be honest the only way to answer your final question is that they, the McCanns are criticized for whatever they do or don't do
.
I agree.
Such an attitude has to come from somewhere and it is my opinion the deliberate smearing of Madeleine McCann's parents at a time they were bound to silence by Portuguese law, but no-one else apparently was, is the main contributor to that.
What I truly find incredible is that it has been kept up for over ten years despite all of the original myths ~ from green lichen ~ to blue tennis bags ~ having been debunked a long time ago.
-
Portuguese police leaks are 'shameless smears' to discredit us, say McCanns
By VANESSA ALLEN
Last updated at 12:00 12 April 2008
Kate and Gerry McCann yesterday accused Portuguese police of using 'shameless smears' against them.
They demanded a judicial inquiry and called on Portugal's justice minister to hunt down the source who leaked their official police statements to the media.
They want the country's police to investigate how the statements - given in the immediate aftermath of their daughter Madeleine's disappearance on May 3 last year - came to be leaked to a Spanish television channel.
Police in the couple's home county of Leicestershire have been informed and MP Stephen Dorrell called on the Foreign Office to raise the matter with the Portuguese authorities.
Police in Portugal supposedly operate in total secrecy and officers, suspects and even witnesses face jail if they speak out about ongoing investigations.
But behind the scenes, officers have briefed selected journalists with a series of sensationalised claims about the 11-month hunt for Madeleine.
The McCanns have endured wild allegations that they could have drugged their children or even dumped Madeleine's body during a publicity visit to Spain.
But they are especially furious about the timing of the latest leak, which derailed a planned trip to the European Parliament to call for an improved alert system for missing children.
The couple met advisers last night to discuss their response to the leak of the statements - in which it was revealed that Madeleine, then three, and her brother Sean, then two, were left crying in their holiday apartment the night before Madeleine disappeared.
A friend of the family said they would not lash out against the police in public.
'They are furious,' he added. 'They are resigned to the fact that they cannot stop this from happening, but their anger hasn't gone away. It's just that revenge is a dish best served cold.'
Mr McCann's sister Philomena said: 'The person responsible must be tracked down and disciplined for this latest leak.
'Gerry and Kate are yet again being victimised by the Portuguese police in the hope that the information will undermine and discredit them in the public's opinion.
'Publicising information about them is obviously aimed at deflecting attention from the fact that the police have not made any breakthroughs in their investigation.'
The couple's spokesman Clarence Mitchell called for an end to the Portuguese police's series of 'smears' against the McCanns, who remain official suspects.
They have categorically denied any involvement in their daughter's disappearance.
Mr Mitchell said: 'It is brazen, it is shameless, it is cack-handed and it has got to stop.
'The Portuguese government must now get a grip on whatever element it is within the Portuguese police who has been responsible for these leaks, who is apparently doing it with impunity.
'Someone in the police doesn't want Kate and Gerry to widen the agenda for whatever reason.
'We know what they're up to - it's ridiculous and it must stop.'
He said the McCanns accepted they had made a huge mistake when they decided to leave their children alone in their Algarve holiday apartment while they ate dinner nearby with friends.
He said: 'They know that they got it wrong, they made a mistake and, boy, are they paying the price for that - in heartbreak and agony.'
The journalist who broke the story, Spanish crime reporter Nacho Abad, refused to reveal his sources or if the documents had come from a police officer.
But supporters of the McCanns said there were few other people who had access to the statements.
Mr Abad, of broadcaster Telecinco, said the timing of the leak was 'sheer coincidence' and not a deliberate attempt to cloud the McCanns' visit to Brussels.
He said it would be 'appalling' if police resources were wasted hunting for his source when they should be investigating Madeleine's disappearance.
'The McCanns can't be upset,' he added.
'So much speculation and so many lies have surrounded the Madeleine McCann case and we have told the truth.'
The row broke out as chief investigator Paulo Rebelo returned to Portugal for a crunch meeting with the public prosecutor who will decide if the McCanns will remain suspects.
Mr Rebelo had monitored British police interviews of the friends who were with the couple on the night Madeleine vanished - the so-called Tapas Seven.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-559151/Portuguese-police-leaks-shameless-smears-discredit-say-McCanns.html
So what was the result of the FCO raising the matter with the Portuguese government?
Do we know if it was raised even?
-
So what was the result of the FCO raising the matter with the Portuguese government?
Do we know if it was raised even?
No idea at all. Maybe it falls under the Portuguese judicial secrecy laws which are so important there that no-one appears to have noticed they were being infringed on a daily basis.
In my opinion, the leak about Madeleine's remark on the third illustrates at least two things ... - contrary to popular belief Madeleine McCanns parents co-operated fully with the Policia Judiciaria ... otherwise we would never have heard about Madeleine's question to them ... they simply would not have passed it on
- it should have been possible to control the leaks from within the investigation ... Rebelo seems to have managed it, I don't know of another like this on his watch ... and whoever did it waited until he was out of the country before practising his or her Spanish
-
I don't think it would ever be necessary in this country, Erngath ... but things are different in Portugal it would seem.
According to Colin Sutton ...
5 Lack of information released to public from Portuguese police
“There was no publicising the case from the local police, which is unheard of back home.
“The public assistance in a case like Madeleine’s would have been huge because of the emotive subject - a missing three-year-old girl. It defies belief that they did not publish e-fits once they had them.
“Their lack of PR explains why the McCanns were so pro-active on that front. They were trying to fill the vacuum.”
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/6-errors-madeleine-mccann-detectives-10272590
Therefore the McCanns were obliged to fend for themselves in a way unheard of for us in Britain who are used to the police controlling every aspect of an investigation ... in particular if the case involves a missing child.
The McCanns had to play catch up for publicity which the police rightly should have generated in the golden hour.
They felt they had to employ private detectives to carry out investigating what might have happened to their missing child.
Rarely if not unheard of in Britain, because the police do it ... so why is it the McCanns who are on the receiving end of criticism for finding themselves in the situation in Portugal where the police apparently don't?
If the McCanns were so concerned by the lack of information being provided to them then why did they not go down to Amaral's control room and get some? Weekly meetings are an absolute joke, at least one parent should have been with the police almost daily.
Much has been made of Kate McCann's refusal to answer simple questions during her arguida interview. She was within her legal right to do so but such behaviour has not brought her any Brownie points. This was her child after all who had disappeared while supposedly under her parental supervision. By refusing to answer those questions she attracted further suspicion and most definitely did the search for Madeleine no favours.
-
No idea at all. Maybe it falls under the Portuguese judicial secrecy laws which are so important there that no-one appears to have noticed they were being infringed on a daily basis.
In my opinion, the leak about Madeleine's remark on the third illustrates at least two things ... - contrary to popular belief Madeleine McCanns parents co-operated fully with the Policia Judiciaria ... otherwise we would never have heard about Madeleine's question to them ... they simply would not have passed it on
- it should have been possible to control the leaks from within the investigation ... Rebelo seems to have managed it, I don't know of another like this on his watch ... and whoever did it waited until he was out of the country before practising his or her Spanish
That is a rash statement which cannot be substantiated. Try as I may I cannot find an IMO as a caveat to that assertion.
Unless you know the conditions imposed by the investigative judge wrt to secrecy you have nothing. If you have them perhaps you will be good enough to post them for the benefit of other posters.
Then of course during the case the law wrt secrecy was changed [29th Aug 2007]with no one on here apparently able to put a handle on whether or not that change was retrospective.
Which all leads to many much noise and heat but little light.
-
Portuguese police leaks are 'shameless smears' to discredit us, say McCanns
By VANESSA ALLEN
Last updated at 12:00 12 April 2008
Kate and Gerry McCann yesterday accused Portuguese police of using 'shameless smears' against them.
They demanded a judicial inquiry and called on Portugal's justice minister to hunt down the source who leaked their official police statements to the media.
They want the country's police to investigate how the statements - given in the immediate aftermath of their daughter Madeleine's disappearance on May 3 last year - came to be leaked to a Spanish television channel.
Police in the couple's home county of Leicestershire have been informed and MP Stephen Dorrell called on the Foreign Office to raise the matter with the Portuguese authorities.
Police in Portugal supposedly operate in total secrecy and officers, suspects and even witnesses face jail if they speak out about ongoing investigations.
But behind the scenes, officers have briefed selected journalists with a series of sensationalised claims about the 11-month hunt for Madeleine.
The McCanns have endured wild allegations that they could have drugged their children or even dumped Madeleine's body during a publicity visit to Spain.
But they are especially furious about the timing of the latest leak, which derailed a planned trip to the European Parliament to call for an improved alert system for missing children.
The couple met advisers last night to discuss their response to the leak of the statements - in which it was revealed that Madeleine, then three, and her brother Sean, then two, were left crying in their holiday apartment the night before Madeleine disappeared.
A friend of the family said they would not lash out against the police in public.
'They are furious,' he added. 'They are resigned to the fact that they cannot stop this from happening, but their anger hasn't gone away. It's just that revenge is a dish best served cold.'
Mr McCann's sister Philomena said: 'The person responsible must be tracked down and disciplined for this latest leak.
'Gerry and Kate are yet again being victimised by the Portuguese police in the hope that the information will undermine and discredit them in the public's opinion.
'Publicising information about them is obviously aimed at deflecting attention from the fact that the police have not made any breakthroughs in their investigation.'
The couple's spokesman Clarence Mitchell called for an end to the Portuguese police's series of 'smears' against the McCanns, who remain official suspects.
They have categorically denied any involvement in their daughter's disappearance.
Mr Mitchell said: 'It is brazen, it is shameless, it is cack-handed and it has got to stop.
'The Portuguese government must now get a grip on whatever element it is within the Portuguese police who has been responsible for these leaks, who is apparently doing it with impunity.
'Someone in the police doesn't want Kate and Gerry to widen the agenda for whatever reason.
'We know what they're up to - it's ridiculous and it must stop.'
He said the McCanns accepted they had made a huge mistake when they decided to leave their children alone in their Algarve holiday apartment while they ate dinner nearby with friends.
He said: 'They know that they got it wrong, they made a mistake and, boy, are they paying the price for that - in heartbreak and agony.'
The journalist who broke the story, Spanish crime reporter Nacho Abad, refused to reveal his sources or if the documents had come from a police officer.
But supporters of the McCanns said there were few other people who had access to the statements.
Mr Abad, of broadcaster Telecinco, said the timing of the leak was 'sheer coincidence' and not a deliberate attempt to cloud the McCanns' visit to Brussels.
He said it would be 'appalling' if police resources were wasted hunting for his source when they should be investigating Madeleine's disappearance.
'The McCanns can't be upset,' he added.
'So much speculation and so many lies have surrounded the Madeleine McCann case and we have told the truth.'
The row broke out as chief investigator Paulo Rebelo returned to Portugal for a crunch meeting with the public prosecutor who will decide if the McCanns will remain suspects.
Mr Rebelo had monitored British police interviews of the friends who were with the couple on the night Madeleine vanished - the so-called Tapas Seven.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-559151/Portuguese-police-leaks-shameless-smears-discredit-say-McCanns.html
Mrs McCann’s statement said: "While we were having breakfast, Madeleine said: 'Mummy, why didn’t you come when we were crying last night?’.
"Gerry and I spoke for a couple of minutes and agreed to keep a closer watch over the children."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/1584584/Madeleine-McCann-complained-to-mother-Kate-about-being-left-crying-alone.html
Kate's statement actually said the twins cried, not Madeleine. She makes no mention at all of discussing it with her husband. If the journalist had her statement why are the details wrong?
In this instance the PJ actually responded;
“At the end of last week, the Spanish television station Telecinco broadcast a news piece that reported that they had enjoyed exclusive access to alleged statements from the McCann couple to the "investigators" into the disappearance of the underage child, Madeleine.
Based on this news piece, the spokesman of this couple, Clarence Mitchell, expressed publicly, to several media, the certainty that the Polícia Judiciária had been responsible for its publication.
The Polícia Judiciária clarifies that it is entirely false that the contents of the news piece reproduces matter that is part of the inquiry, which is under judicial secrecy.
On the other hand, the Polícia Judiciária cannot fail to lament the baseless intervention of the spokesman, especially at a moment when significant diligences to the investigation were being carried out.”
Polícia Judiciária’s website, 14.04.2008
https://joana-morais.blogspot.co.uk/2009/08/crying-incident.html
Was an official complaint made to the PJ by the McCanns? Not that I can find.
-
That is a rash statement which cannot be substantiated. Try as I may I cannot find an IMO as a caveat to that assertion.
Unless you know the conditions imposed by the investigative judge wrt to secrecy you have nothing. If you have them perhaps you will be good enough to post them for the benefit of other posters.
Then of course during the case the law wrt secrecy was changed [29th Aug 2007]with no one on here apparently able to put a handle on whether or not that change was retrospective.
Which all leads to many much noise and heat but little light.
You really haven't thought that one through, have you? Unless your suggestion is that an investigative judge absolved everyone from the secrecy law ... with the exception of Madeleine's parents and their friends?
-
You really haven't thought that one through, have you? Unless your suggestion is that an investigative judge absolved everyone from the secrecy law ... with the exception of Madeleine's parents and their friends?
Haven't I ?. Unless you have the full SP on what was decreed with regard secrecy then you are guessing. So as you know [you assert by implication] post the details for our benefit.
There is an erroneous assumption in your post btw. Your get out of jail free card.
-
Haven't I ?. Unless you have the full SP on what was decreed with regard secrecy then you are guessing. So as you know [you assert by implication] post the details for our benefit.
There is an erroneous assumption in your post btw. Your get out of jail free card.
Surely if the new law was intended to be retrospective there would have to be a(n) historical limitation set?
-
Off topic posts to which I too have added have been removed.
Topic is "Portuguese judicial secrecy law and its impact on the Madeleine case".
-
Surely if the new law was intended to be retrospective there would have to be a(n) historical limitation set?
I would have thought so.
The fact no one seems to know much about the actual nuts and bolts of the particular law would indicate to me their knowledge of the entire process is a touch flaky and not to be relied upon when push comes to shove. Leading to Humpty Dumptysville "It means whatever I want it to mean to suit whatever theory I am propounding".
-
There have been numerous allegations of leaks by the PJ, but as yet no-one has been able to demonstrate beyond doubt that it happened.
The impact of the judicial secrecy law was that lots of speculation took place in the media of Portugal and the UK. That speculation wasn't caused by the judicial secrecy laws, it was caused by irresponsible journalists and editors who decided to print or broadcast stories for which they had no reliable sources.