im looking at the overall picture and for me it looks bad for amaral
Whatever the true position on the burden of proof, there are key lies of Amaral's that can be disproved:
Madeleine was never driven anywhere in the car (dead or alive)
Mark Harrison did not switch the enquiry to one for a little girl assumed dead. He was handed a brief to consider that Madeleine had been "murdered" and worked to it.
In reaching his "thesis" that Gerry "hid" Madeleine's body on the beach, Amaral plagiarised the proper detective work of Mark Harrison (who, himself, never said any such thing).
If the McCanns have Stuart Prior's report, disproving that Prior rang the FSS to berate them on the PJ's powers of arrest after being contradicted and corrected by Amaral on interpretation of the forensic results ought to be a doddle.
Disproving the "frozen cadaver remains from the boot of the car" comment is as easy as reading John Lowe's forensic report.
Difficult to know how Grime's deception over presentation of the dogs and incompetent handling of them will affect things. The judges may view it that Amaral couldn't reasonably be expected to understand principles of dog handling, even though PJ Inspector Dias had a good grasp of the subject.
Still, Amaral's claim in his book that Eddie had no hesitation in singling out the Renault is patently false.
There never was a "preliminary report", only an e-mail from John Lowe to Stuart Prior explaining a result from the one and only report.
I'm sure there's much more ...
