Sceptics beliefs ?

[Brietta]

Whatever - she refused to answer although knowing it could harm the investigation as to what happened to Maddie

Why do that - oh yes she thought it may harm her IMO if she answered the questions.

You've got that entirely wrong.  The moment Kate was made an arguida she was the focus of the police case not Madeleine.

What makes you think the police were looking for Madeleine when they were obviously looking for a conviction?

[jassi]

You've got that entirely wrong.  The moment Kate was made an arguida she was the focus of the police case not Madeleine.

What makes you think the police were looking for Madeleine when they were obviously looking for a conviction?

In the expectation that one might follow the other.

Isn't that what OG is attempting to do, for they are certainly not actually looking for Madeleine ?

[Brietta]

What would be the reason for her not answering a pretty routine set of questions? After all, in the one question she did answer, she confirmed that not doing so may impede the search for her daughter - so she's aware of the ramifications.

Snip
Today Carlos had advised me not to answer any of the questions put to me. He explained that this was my right as an arguida and it was the safest option: any responses I gave might unintentionally implicate me in some way.
He knew the system better than I ever would, so it struck me as prudent to accept his guidance.
Since I was unable to comprehend how anything I’d said already could have led me to this point, I wasn’t about to try to get through to the police again now.    Kate McCann

She acted on legal advice and having spent many hours being interrogated on the previous day knew that the police just weren't listening to what she had to say or they would not have made her arguida.

I think she was well aware of the ramifications.  She would know that Joana Cipriano's mother was in jail and that no-one was looking for Joana who was the last missing child case Amaral had worked.

[The General]

Snip
Today Carlos had advised me not to answer any of the questions put to me. He explained that this was my right as an arguida and it was the safest option: any responses I gave might unintentionally implicate me in some way.
He knew the system better than I ever would, so it struck me as prudent to accept his guidance.
Since I was unable to comprehend how anything I’d said already could have led me to this point, I wasn’t about to try to get through to the police again now.    Kate McCann

She acted on legal advice and having spent many hours being interrogated on the previous day knew that the police just weren't listening to what she had to say or they would not have made her arguida.

I think she was well aware of the ramifications.  She would know that Joana Cipriano's mother was in jail and that no-one was looking for Joana who was the last missing child case Amaral had worked.

Plausible on the face of it. I'm not sure she would have been aware of Cipriano case to that degree, however.
And it doesn't explain why then Gerry thought it necessary to cooperate fully. An interesting change in strategy and advice tailored to each.

[Brietta]

Plausible on the face of it. I'm not sure she would have been aware of Cipriano case to that degree, however.
And it doesn't explain why then Gerry thought it necessary to cooperate fully. An interesting change in strategy and advice tailored to each.

I think there is a very high probability that having been informed of the attacks on British children Kate and Gerry would also have been informed of Leonor Cipriano's fate.  If she had had any doubts these would have been allayed when she read the following ...

I think Gerry was safe enough ... they obviously thought the weakest link was Madeleine's mother.


'Portuguese police framed my wife'
By Andrew Johnson
September 10 2007

The husband of a woman jailed in Portugal for killing her child in a case with uncanny similarities to that of Madeleine McCann has spoken of his fear that Madeleine's parents may be framed for their daughter's murder.

Leonor Cipriano, 36, is serving a 16-year jail sentence following the disappearance of her daughter, Joana, nine, in September 2004, just seven miles from where Madeleine McCann vanished. The investigating officer was Detective Goncalo Amaral, now leading the McCann inquiry.

Yesterday, however, Leonor's husband, Leandro Silva, reiterated claims that his wife had been beaten by Mr Amaral during interrogation. Mr Amaral and four other officers were charged over the allegations. Despite this, he has not been removed from the McCann case.

"I am worried Kate McCann will be framed, the way it happened to my wife," Mr Silva said.

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/world-news/portuguese-police-framed-my-wife-28437583.html

[Venturi Swirl]

We will never know,so why speculate ?

A nice adage to abide by yet it doesn't stop people speculating about what happened to Madeleine and who did it, especially with reference to her parents.  Incidentally G-Unit was speculating and you didn't seem to have a problem with that!

[misty]

Snip
Today Carlos had advised me not to answer any of the questions put to me. He explained that this was my right as an arguida and it was the safest option: any responses I gave might unintentionally implicate me in some way.
He knew the system better than I ever would, so it struck me as prudent to accept his guidance.
Since I was unable to comprehend how anything I’d said already could have led me to this point, I wasn’t about to try to get through to the police again now.    Kate McCann

She acted on legal advice and having spent many hours being interrogated on the previous day knew that the police just weren't listening to what she had to say or they would not have made her arguida.

I think she was well aware of the ramifications.  She would know that Joana Cipriano's mother was in jail and that no-one was looking for Joana who was the last missing child case Amaral had worked.

I think it's important to remember what happened on the evening of 6th September 2007 following Kate's first day of interviews. This was the evening Carlos Abreu & his assistant Sophia arrived at the McCanns' rental villa with the news of the proposed "plea bargain" for Kate to consider. Gerry was not being implicated. In the circumstances, there was every reason for Kate to take her lawyer's advice & refuse to co-operate any further when it was abundantly clear what the PJ intentions were. All imo.

[The General]

I think there is a very high probability that having been informed of the attacks on British children Kate and Gerry would also have been informed of Leonor Cipriano's fate.  If she had had any doubts these would have been allayed when she read the following ...

I think Gerry was safe enough ... they obviously thought the weakest link was Madeleine's mother.


'Portuguese police framed my wife'

I'm going to stick my neck out on this one* - having re-read the evidence this afternoon - it's safe for me to assume that:
1. The police kicked lumps out of the accused, making any conviction unsound.
2. They absolutely killed that girl and disposed of her body (and I'm not even basing that on the fact that they were convicted). She wasn't framed. Quite why the husband defends the wretch is beyond comprehension.

I would not be using that case as a like for like. She's not 'missing'; she's been well disposed of.

*all opinions are purely that of The General and are not attributable to the forum, authors, owners and associates. All rights reserved. Your home is at risk if you set fire to it.

[Mr Gray]

I'm going to stick my neck out on this one* - having re-read the evidence this afternoon - it's safe for me to assume that:
1. The police kicked lumps out of the accused, making any conviction unsound.
2. They absolutely killed that girl and disposed of her body (and I'm not even basing that on the fact that they were convicted). She wasn't framed. Quite why the husband defends the wretch is beyond comprehension.

I would not be using that case as a like for like. She's not 'missing'; she's been well disposed of.

*all opinions are purely that of The General and are not attributable to the forum, authors, owners and associates. All rights reserved. Your home is at risk if you set fire to it.

I take it you know very little about the cipriano case... Such as the evidence against her

[Venturi Swirl]

I'm going to stick my neck out on this one* - having re-read the evidence this afternoon - it's safe for me to assume that:
1. The police kicked lumps out of the accused, making any conviction unsound.
2. They absolutely killed that girl and disposed of her body (and I'm not even basing that on the fact that they were convicted). She wasn't framed. Quite why the husband defends the wretch is beyond comprehension.

I would not be using that case as a like for like. She's not 'missing'; she's been well disposed of.

*all opinions are purely that of The General and are not attributable to the forum, authors, owners and associates. All rights reserved. Your home is at risk if you set fire to it.

Can I ask what makes you so absolutely certain they killed her?

[The General]

I take it you know very little about the cipriano case... Such as the evidence against her

You take it right. Convince me. In the appropriate thread, obviously. Let's take this out in to the car park.

[The General]

Can I ask what makes you so absolutely certain they killed her?

Call it a hunch.
No seriously, on balance, given the history of abuse and neglect that residents report, the manner in which she was brought up, the multi-farious means by which they attempted to explain.....blah, blah..
....BECAUSE THE DUDE CONFESSED TO IT! And he didn't need that much of a pasting for him to sing either.

[Brietta]

Plausible on the face of it. I'm not sure she would have been aware of Cipriano case to that degree, however.
And it doesn't explain why then Gerry thought it necessary to cooperate fully. An interesting change in strategy and advice tailored to each.

Gerry watched the dog videos?? (which calls to mind my own bemusement at first sighting)  and was refused sight of the DNA evidence.  I think he might have been angry?? just a guess though since I wasn't there.

[Brietta]

I think it's important to remember what happened on the evening of 6th September 2007 following Kate's first day of interviews. This was the evening Carlos Abreu & his assistant Sophia arrived at the McCanns' rental villa with the news of the proposed "plea bargain" for Kate to consider. Gerry was not being implicated. In the circumstances, there was every reason for Kate to take her lawyer's advice & refuse to co-operate any further when it was abundantly clear what the PJ intentions were. All imo.

It is my opinion that Kate was the target.  She is a highly intelligent woman whose anger at the knowledge that the search for Madeleine had been abandoned to concentrate resources on her gave her the strength to resist what was a pretty brutal interrogation.
There was also zero chance of her appearing at the door of the police station in front of the world media having had her face and body severely injured by going head first down stairs???

[Brietta]

I'm going to stick my neck out on this one* - having re-read the evidence this afternoon - it's safe for me to assume that:
1. The police kicked lumps out of the accused, making any conviction unsound.
2. They absolutely killed that girl and disposed of her body (and I'm not even basing that on the fact that they were convicted). She wasn't framed. Quite why the husband defends the wretch is beyond comprehension.

I would not be using that case as a like for like. She's not 'missing'; she's been well disposed of.

*all opinions are purely that of The General and are not attributable to the forum, authors, owners and associates. All rights reserved. Your home is at risk if you set fire to it.

Joana went missing and no trace of her was found ... the case was 'solved' in much the same manner as the PJ hoped to 'solve' Madeleine's case.
It seems that sceptics don't like the idea that unlike Joana's ... Madeleine's case is still being worked.

By the way ~ having reviewed the evidence in Joana's case ... what is your opinion of the forensics, particularly the blood evidence?