How did it change the opinion of the PP?
The AG decided that the case was to be filed under 277/1 - the crime has not been verified or the defendant has not committed the crime under investigation.
The SC decided, in their not-so-infinite wisdom, that what had actually been shown in the volumes of files which they hadn't read, was that the public prosecution hadn't collected sufficient signs of the verification of the crime or of its agents - thus altering the context of the application of law in a legal document.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm*snipped
The archiving reported is worded as follows:-
- Despite all of this, it was not possible to obtain any piece of evidence that would allow for a medium man, under the light of the criteria of logics, of normality and of the general rules of experience, to formulate any lucid, sensate, serious and honest conclusion about the circumstances under which the child was removed from the apartment (whether dead or alive, whether killed in a neglectful homicide or an intended homicide, whether the victim of a targeted abduction or an opportunistic abduction), nor even to produce a consistent prognosis about her destiny and inclusively - the most dramatic - to establish whether she is still alive or if she is dead, as seems more likely.
But therefore we do not possess any minimally solid and rigorous foundation in order to be able to state, with the safety that is requested, which was or were the exact and precise crime(s) that was or were practised on the person of the minor Madeleine McCann - apart from the supposed but dismissed crime of exposure or abandonment - or to hold anyone responsible over its authorship.
