Oprah Winfrey Interview

[G-Unit]

How do you know she hadn't turned on the light by that stage?  She is a doctor so I'd imagine she went in and put her hand out and felt the window and found it had been slid across.  They are trained to poke and prod to make a diagnosis.

She diagnosed an open window? I've heard it all now. 

[misty]

What was fluttering in the breeze then? The curtains were open according to the parents.

I prefer to believe the words written or spoken directly by Kate, not an interpreter's report of what was thought to have been said.

[slartibartfast]

I prefer to believe the words written or spoken directly by Kate, not an interpreter's report of what was thought to have been said.

Though the early the statement, the more likely it is to be more accurate.

[misty]

Though the early the statement, the more likely it is to be more accurate.

It is only more accurate if it is understood correctly, translated correctly, recorded correctly & re-translated correctly. Too much margin for error imho.

[G-Unit]

It is only more accurate if it is understood correctly, translated correctly, recorded correctly & re-translated correctly. Too much margin for error imho.

You either accept all the statements or you accept none of them. What seems to happen is those that people dislike are rejected and those they like are quoted. Cherry picking.

[misty]

You either accept all the statements or you accept none of them. What seems to happen is those that people dislike are rejected and those they like are quoted. Cherry picking.

When I first became interested in the online case I did accept the statements as being accurate. Now I don't, simply because of translation errors & omissions we have already identified & the clear contradictions with what we have heard straight from the horse's mouth. Spending hours dissecting each & every anomaly in the Tapas 9 statements is only relevant if you believe people within the group have done something criminal. As I don't believe that, I'd rather look at the evidence away from the group.

[G-Unit]

When I first became interested in the online case I did accept the statements as being accurate. Now I don't, simply because of translation errors & omissions we have already identified & the clear contradictions with what we have heard straight from the horse's mouth. Spending hours dissecting each & every anomaly in the Tapas 9 statements is only relevant if you believe people within the group have done something criminal. As I don't believe that, I'd rather look at the evidence away from the group.

You and Operation Grange both! 

I agree that there are contradictions, but I don't think translation errors and omissions are the reason for them..

[Robittybob1]

You and Operation Grange both! 

I agree that there are contradictions, but I don't think translation errors and omissions are the reason for them..

Translation errors and omissions certainly don't help.

[G-Unit]

Translation errors and omissions certainly don't help.

Do they even exist or are they a myth? We had a thread for translation errors and found nothing of interest. I don't know what is meant by omissions.

[Robittybob1]

Do they even exist or are they a myth? We had a thread for translation errors and found nothing of interest. I don't know what is meant by omissions.

Statements not included in file. would be as good example of omissions.

[slartibartfast]

Statements not included in file. would be as good example of omissions.

They maybe unreleased rather than missing.

[Robittybob1]

They maybe unreleased rather than missing.

What is an omission then - what about all those MW guests that didn't get interviewed.  wasn't there a person with the surname Topman

[G-Unit]

What is an omission then - what about all those MW guests that didn't get interviewed.  wasn't there a person with the surname Topman

Until the poster who mentions omissions explains we don't know what they are. However;

Leicestershire Police were tasked with sending questionnaires to everyone who was there on 3rd. If there was information in the replies it would have been their job to follow it up. See page 6.

http://library.college.police.uk/docs/npia/Strategic-debrief-operation-task-2009.pdf

[G-Unit]

Statements not included in file. would be as good example of omissions.

All the formal statements taken by the PJ were filed. Nothing was left out. Some statements were removed before the files were made public, and the reasons are documented.

http://mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MISSING_PAGES.htm

[Benice]

Do they even exist or are they a myth? We had a thread for translation errors and found nothing of interest. I don't know what is meant by omissions.

Not a myth according to this interpreter's own notes: 

Quote
[M Oldfield's  Statement 10th May   Again, there were several omissions from, and errors in, the original Portuguese. I corrected those that I found. Also, much of the Portuguese statement is written with a convoluted 'future + past' verb construct that attributes an 'uncertainty' to the words, whereas I have translated much of it in a non-literal manner to make it read more definitively.

 Hence, the reader must understand that neither the Portuguese nor my translation necessarily constitute the exact words spoken by Oldfield.

If you read MO's Rogatory Letter testimony you will get a sense of the difficulty the Portuguese interpreter faced when listening to this man.]
End quote

The interpretor herself tells us that neither her translation nor the Portuguese translation can be guaranteed to be accurate and explains the difficulties faced by interpreters.

The idea that no errors whatsoeover could have crept into translations of statements which had previously been translated by a different translator is definitely a myth IMO.

Why anyone would dismiss this interpreter's explanation as 'nothing of interest' is a mystery to me.   I would say it's extremely pertinent if people are under the misapprehension that it is a fact that translations are always accurate.
IMO