Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?

[stephen25000]

Dreadful !   What are the Portuguese Authorities thinking of ?

What do you mean by that Sadie ?

Can you explain further ?


People do not always tell the truth, even in court.

[slartibartfast]

It runs in my mind that the claim was made during discussion on the forum ... I've carried out a search but haven't come across it again.
I've got to admit it certainly doesn't sound kosher and Davel is correct to request a cite.  Maybe someone can come up with one ... or maybe will even remember the discussion.  So far it seems it is just you and I who seem to recall it.

Google is your friend.

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=wg1dvc2lfcEC&pg=PA126&lpg=PA126&dq=If+a+person+becomes+an+arguido,+they+automatically+gain+certain+rights+that+a+witness+or+suspect+would+not+have&source=bl&ots=0ezbf8kyLT&sig=TEoTJtQjcISyrfdsJ0tbX3ZXTP8&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjRrsGfu4zYAhWJuBQKHSLuCDgQ6AEwAnoECAkQAQ#v=onepage&q=If%20a%20person%20becomes%20an%20arguido%2C%20they%20automatically%20gain%20certain%20rights%20that%20a%20witness%20or%20suspect%20would%20not%20have&f=false

[Mr Gray]

Google is your friend.

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=wg1dvc2lfcEC&pg=PA126&lpg=PA126&dq=If+a+person+becomes+an+arguido,+they+automatically+gain+certain+rights+that+a+witness+or+suspect+would+not+have&source=bl&ots=0ezbf8kyLT&sig=TEoTJtQjcISyrfdsJ0tbX3ZXTP8&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjRrsGfu4zYAhWJuBQKHSLuCDgQ6AEwAnoECAkQAQ#v=onepage&q=If%20a%20person%20becomes%20an%20arguido%2C%20they%20automatically%20gain%20certain%20rights%20that%20a%20witness%20or%20suspect%20would%20not%20have&f=false

So no legal action for lying.....would their be legal action for perverting the cause of justice..

[Mr Gray]

Google is your friend.

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=wg1dvc2lfcEC&pg=PA126&lpg=PA126&dq=If+a+person+becomes+an+arguido,+they+automatically+gain+certain+rights+that+a+witness+or+suspect+would+not+have&source=bl&ots=0ezbf8kyLT&sig=TEoTJtQjcISyrfdsJ0tbX3ZXTP8&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjRrsGfu4zYAhWJuBQKHSLuCDgQ6AEwAnoECAkQAQ#v=onepage&q=If%20a%20person%20becomes%20an%20arguido%2C%20they%20automatically%20gain%20certain%20rights%20that%20a%20witness%20or%20suspect%20would%20not%20have&f=false

I have actually provided this link before.....it still does not make sense....is perverting the course of justice an offence in Portugal

[faithlilly]

I've looked and at the moment can't find one....as you haven't provided a cite then it's just opinion by you too

You claimed that Colin Stagg refused to answer police questions while being interviewed yet he was innocent. Your insinuation was that innocent people DO refuse to answer questions. You have failed to prove this with your example.

[Alice Purjorick]

It runs in my mind that the claim was made during discussion on the forum ... I've carried out a search but haven't come across it again.
I've got to admit it certainly doesn't sound kosher and Davel is correct to request a cite.  Maybe someone can come up with one ... or maybe will even remember the discussion.  So far it seems it is just you and I who seem to recall it.

Try looking in "Toward a Prosecutor for the European Union Volume 1: A Comparative Analysis".
Section 18 pages 540 through 586.
In the full knowledge you will have to buy it at the paltry sum of 150 Euros or go to your reference library this is what it says:
"The Portuguese procedural system assigns the arguido the right to remain silent during the procedure from the moment he/she is formally designated arguido/arguida.
The fact that the arguido decides to remain silent cannot be detrimental to himself. Moreover the CCP does not threaten with a sanction of anykind the arguido that having decided to talk instead of remaining silent makes false declarations.
This does not confer a right to lie merely a right not to be punished for lying.
As a consequence of the right to remain silent the arguido has no duty of any kind to cooperate with investigative authorities for the purpose of determining the truth.
It should also be noted that as a refraction of the privilege against self incrimination the arguido cannot under circumstances make a declaration under oath.(CCP Article14(3))".


There is also a section relating to witnesses and a very informative bit re suspect definition and limiting time for arguido status. Not to mention sections for all member states of the EU which are also informative.
I'll leave you to buy the book or visit the library.
If you think the book is unreliable refer back to the EU they commissioned it.

p.s you could also try wiki 

The rights of an arguido

"If a person becomes an arguido, they automatically gain certain rights that a witness or suspect would not have.[7] An arguido has the right to be accompanied by a lawyer when questioned.[5] The investigating police may ask the arguido more direct accusatory questions (the answers to which would not be admissible in court if possibly self-incriminatory and asked of a non-arguido) but the arguido must be presented with whatever evidence is held against them,[7] and unlike a witness has the right to remain silent,[8] not to answer any question that may incriminate the person, and does not face legal action for lying.[9]"

https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmXoypizjW3WknFiJnKLwHCnL72vedxjQkDDP1mXWo6uco/wiki/Arguido.html

Pick the bones out of that!

[Brietta]

Google is your friend.

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=wg1dvc2lfcEC&pg=PA126&lpg=PA126&dq=If+a+person+becomes+an+arguido,+they+automatically+gain+certain+rights+that+a+witness+or+suspect+would+not+have&source=bl&ots=0ezbf8kyLT&sig=TEoTJtQjcISyrfdsJ0tbX3ZXTP8&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjRrsGfu4zYAhWJuBQKHSLuCDgQ6AEwAnoECAkQAQ#v=onepage&q=If%20a%20person%20becomes%20an%20arguido%2C%20they%20automatically%20gain%20certain%20rights%20that%20a%20witness%20or%20suspect%20would%20not%20have&f=false

Thank you.

Another contradiction in terms would appear to be ... "Portuguese law makes a distinction between arguido and suspect" automatically gaining certain rights that neither a witness or a suspect are entitled to.
Interestingly it also states that an arguido must be shown the evidence against him/her.

[slartibartfast]

Anybody on trial who is found guilty is not charged with perjury just because they pleaded not guilty. Amaral was charged with making a false statement. That statement was not in a trial.

I’m surprised that wasn't obvious.

[Mr Gray]

Try looking in "Toward a Prosecutor for the European Union Volume 1: A Comparative Analysis".
Section 18 pages 540 through 586.
In the full knowledge you will have to buy it at the paltry sum of 150 Euros or go to your reference library this is what it says:
"The Portuguese procedural system assigns the arguido the right to remain silent during the procedure from the moment he/she is formally designated arguido/arguida.
The fact that the arguido decides to remain silent cannot be detrimental to himself. Moreover the CCP does not threaten with a sanction of anykind the arguido that having decided to talk instead of remaining silent makes false declarations.
This does not confer a right to lie merely a right not to be punished for lying.
As a consequence of the right to remain silent the arguido has no duty of any kind to cooperate with investigative authorities for the purpose of determining the truth.
It should also be noted that as a refraction of the privilege against self incrimination the arguido cannot under circumstances make a declaration under oath.(CCP Article14(3))".


There is also a section relating to witnesses and a very informative bit re suspect definition and limiting time for arguido status. Not to mention sections for all member states of the EU which are also informative.
I'll leave you to buy the book or visit the library.
If you think the book is unreliable refer back to the EU they commissioned it.

p.s you could also try wiki 

The rights of an arguido

"If a person becomes an arguido, they automatically gain certain rights that a witness or suspect would not have.[7] An arguido has the right to be accompanied by a lawyer when questioned.[5] The investigating police may ask the arguido more direct accusatory questions (the answers to which would not be admissible in court if possibly self-incriminatory and asked of a non-arguido) but the arguido must be presented with whatever evidence is held against them,[7] and unlike a witness has the right to remain silent,[8] not to answer any question that may incriminate the person, and does not face legal action for lying.[9]"[/b]

https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmXoypizjW3WknFiJnKLwHCnL72vedxjQkDDP1mXWo6uco/wiki/Arguido.html

Pick the bones out of that!

after the word "lying" there is a number 9 in brackets which suggests further clarification...without that clarification the claim is not clearly made

[Mr Gray]

Putting aside the attempt to go off topic, anybody on trial who is found guilty is not charged with perjury just because they pleaded not guilty. Amaral was charged with making a false statement. That statement was not in a trial.

I’m surprised that wasn't obvious.

I didnt mnetion amaral and the post was not off topic as it relates to Kates arguido status. Amaral was charged with making a false statement and was questioned as a suspect ...arguido...when he made that statement...so what you are suggesting is arguidos can lie....but they cannot make false statements

[Benice]

Putting aside the attempt to go off topic, anybody on trial who is found guilty is not charged with perjury just because they pleaded not guilty. Amaral was charged with making a false statement. That statement was not in a trial.

I’m surprised that wasn't obvious.

Is it actually known whether - like Kate, Amaral exercised his right to silence when he was made an arguido?    Just curious.

[Mr Gray]

If that is wiki it refers to their citation 9 whatever that is.
If it was something to do with me it was a typo as ( is shift 9; I miss it frequently 9 due to my crap keyboard skills) 

Thank you so much...its this...1 2 "Arguidos E Regresso". Dn.sapo.pt. Retrieved 2010-04-25.....unfortunately it does not seem to be there any more...so there is still a question

[Alice Purjorick]

Im trying to but my post is deleted...try this.....after the word "lying" there is a number 9 in brackets which suggests further clarification...without that clarification the claim is not clearly made

If it was from Wiki it would be their ctatation 9 whatever that is 9 I would place more reliance on what was published in the works funded by the EU 0.

If it was in something I posted it is more than likely a typo caused by my crap keyboard skills.
( being shift9.  and ) being shift0. 9 I misstype that frequently) 

[Alice Purjorick]

Is it actually known whether - like Kate, Amaral exercised his right to silence when he was made an arguido?    Just curious.

Who cares?
Provided he exercised his rights under the law what difference does it make anyway?

[Alice Purjorick]

Thank you so much...its this...1 2 "Arguidos E Regresso". Dn.sapo.pt. Retrieved 2010-04-25.....unfortunately it does not seem to be there any more...so there is still a question

Only as far as wiki is concerned.
The other cite remains so pick holes in that but with the EU not me.