Goncalo Amaral.

[Eleanor]

Dreadlocks can be attached to short hair in a few hours.

What?  Have you gone completely loopy?

[Brietta]

When and where did Amaral accuse the McCanns of killing their child? Not in his much maligned and misquoted book;

The conclusions my team and I have arrived at are the following:
1. The minor, Madeleine McCann died inside apartment 5A of the Ocean Club in Vila
da Luz, on the night of May 3rd 2007;
2. There was simulation of abduction.
3. Kate Healy and Gerald McCann were probably involved in the concealment of their
daughter's body.
4. The death may have occurred as a result of a tragic accident;
TOTL final page.

You claim to hold no brief for Amaral  but you insist on playing word games on his behalf.

There is no evidence supporting anything Amaral lays claim to in his book.

For example there is no evidence for the claim that Madeleine died in the apartment.  Just as there was no evidence that Joana Cipriano was fed to the pigs by her mother.  In fact - no evidence for the death of either child.

The only evidence for lying was proven in a Portuguese court and the liar was and is Amaral.

[kizzy]

You claim to hold no brief for Amaral  but you insist on playing word games on his behalf.

There is no evidence supporting anything Amaral lays claim to in his book.

For example there is no evidence for the claim that Madeleine died in the apartment.  Just as there was no evidence that Joana Cipriano was fed to the pigs by her mother.  In fact - no evidence for the death of either child.

The only evidence for lying was proven in a Portuguese court and the liar was and is Amaral.

There doesn't seem to be much evidence of anything in this case.

You keep calling GA  a liar but it seems it hasn't affected his credibility...has it.

The book has been challenged several times and won.

It was wrote from the case files after all.

 

[Brietta]

There doesn't seem to be much evidence of anything in this case.

You keep calling GA  a liar but it seems it hasn't affected his credibility...has it.

The book has been challenged several times and won.

It was wrote from the case files after all.

I'm not sure about Amaral's recent excursions onto the wavelengths not having an effect on whatever credibility he may still have had in Portugal.

Nor am I too sure that relying on case files written by the co-ordinator of the investigation (plus the Portuguese press) for the provenance of a book written by the co-ordinator quite hits an appropriate note.

Amaral seems to have given up his ubiquitous public appearances since his dreadlock debacle.  Unless you know different.  When did he last appear on the interview sofa?

[kizzy]

I'm not sure about Amaral's recent excursions onto the wavelengths not having an effect on whatever credibility he may still have had in Portugal.

Nor am I too sure that relying on case files written by the co-ordinator of the investigation (plus the Portuguese press) for the provenance of a book written by the co-ordinator quite hits an appropriate note.

Amaral seems to have given up his ubiquitous public appearances since his dreadlock debacle.  Unless you know different.  When did he last appear on the interview sofa?

Well everything is at a bit of a standstill at the moment..........isn't it

[Brietta]

Well everything is at a bit of a standstill at the moment..........isn't it

No - it is not!

Amaral started the present turn of events when he gave his 2019 interview on Saunokonoko's podcast.

He interfered yet again when he followed up with publishing misleading information about the German investigation;  all of which from dreadlocks to cartoons on the camper van were roundly refuted by Brueckner and van's appearance in a video made shortly prior to Madeleine's disappearance.

Think about the significance of that.

Amaral makes the news when there is none.  It is the one thing for which he can be relied.  He hasn't closed his mouth on Madeleine's case and impugning her parents for over fifteen years.

Why do you think he would stop doing that now?  When things are not at a "standstill" as you say - but in the midst of a very active investigation indeed!

[kizzy]

No - it is not!

Amaral started the present turn of events when he gave his 2019 interview on Saunokonoko's podcast.

He interfered yet again when he followed up with publishing misleading information about the German investigation;  all of which from dreadlocks to cartoons on the camper van were roundly refuted by Brueckner and van's appearance in a video made shortly prior to Madeleine's disappearance.

Think about the significance of that.

Amaral makes the news when there is none.  It is the one thing for which he can be relied.  He hasn't closed his mouth on Madeleine's case and impugning her parents for over fifteen years.

Why do you think he would stop doing that now?  When things are not at a "standstill" as you say - but in the midst of a very active investigation indeed!

Think about the significance of that.


Well, the significance of that is it only seems to be a problem with you or one or two. on here.

No one else seems interested or sees it as a problem.


midst of a very active investigation indeed!

Do you mean the one where they might, they could, it might happen this year?

The investigation they have had concrete evidence for nearly three years...........ye right


 

[G-Unit]

You claim to hold no brief for Amaral  but you insist on playing word games on his behalf.

There is no evidence supporting anything Amaral lays claim to in his book.

For example there is no evidence for the claim that Madeleine died in the apartment.  Just as there was no evidence that Joana Cipriano was fed to the pigs by her mother.  In fact - no evidence for the death of either child.

The only evidence for lying was proven in a Portuguese court and the liar was and is Amaral.

When and where did Amaral utter 'the lie that one has killed one's child'?

[Brietta]

When and where did Amaral utter 'the lie that one has killed one's child'?

Your contention that over fifteen years worth of accusations that Madeleine's parents were responsible for her death and concealment of her corpse isn't one of the greatest lies ever told.

What exactly do you think he is saying?  And what do you think his proof for saying it is?

[kizzy]

Your contention that over fifteen years worth of accusations that Madeleine's parents were responsible for her death and concealment of her corpse isn't one of the greatest lies ever told.

What exactly do you think he is saying?  And what do you think his proof for saying it is?

 Obviously, the whole purpose of this book was written to explain one perspective on the case from a first-hand account

[G-Unit]

Your contention that over fifteen years worth of accusations that Madeleine's parents were responsible for her death and concealment of her corpse isn't one of the greatest lies ever told.

What exactly do you think he is saying?  And what do you think his proof for saying it is?

He gave his opinion about what happened, just as the McCanns did. Opinions don't need to be proved.

[Anthro]

 Obviously, the whole purpose of this book was written to explain one perspective on the case from a first-hand account

A malicious account, imo.

[Anthro]

He gave his opinion about what happened, just as the McCanns did. Opinions don't need to be proved.

Difference is that his opinion was subjective and not objective. The McCanns know their daughter and could predict back then, how she would react and behave.

[Wonderfulspam]

"did absolutely nothing about conducting a process of investigating known paedophiles for elimination purposes"

You're the PJ.

You go to a known sex offenders house, (even though there's absolutely nothing to suggest he in particular abducted Maddie) you knock on his door, he exercises his right to remain silent & won't let officers search his home.

You can't force the man to talk, & can't search his home without a warrant.

What's your next move?

Never got an answer for this one.

[Wonderfulspam]

Difference is that his opinion was subjective and not objective. The McCanns know their daughter and could predict back then, how she would react and behave.

This presumes the McCanns complete honesty. Not very objective at all really is it.