Why was Gonçalo Amaral taken off the Madeleine McCann case?

[Carana]

I think you might be right about that.

It doesn't put the quest for the material truth in a very good light, does it?

I don't recall a single interview in which he admitted that the other family members didn't agree (bar Martin's wife who didn't appear convinced enough to make a corroborating statement).

[G-Unit]

They didn't want to go back because they couldn't see any likeness to Gerry.

Do you think that Mr Smiths words were added to and the meaning enlarged by Amaral ?

Did he just contact Amaral to say that the method of carrying the little girl was just like the method that Smithman used .. and nothing more?  Was he just trying to add to info already given? 

Because from later statements by him we know that he didn't think that Smithman was Gerry.

I thinkj that he was just trying to fill out his statement about the method of carrying. 


.... Nothing else intended ... but that Amaral "made the best" of it".  Only my opinion and I know that I could be wrong.

20th September Smith contacted Leicester Police saying the man he saw on 3rd May was Gerald McCann.  LP passed it on to the PJ.

27th September Paiva spoke to Smith by phone and Smith said he was willing to return to Portugal to make another statement.

Amaral taken off the case.

10th October Paiva visited Kelly's to check if the Smiths had been there on 3rd. The staff couldn't remember, but gave copies of till receipts.

8th November Questions by PJ sent to Ireland for Smith to answer.

30th January 2008 Smith gives a new statement. He is basing his opinion on mannerisms, rather than the face; the way GM carried the child and the way he moved his head had triggered his memory. He is 60-80% certain. He has, meanwhile, been contacted by Brian Kennedy to do an e-fit. He refused.

I can't find any later statements where he decides it's not Gerry he saw.

If Amaral had not been taken off the case would he have brought Smith back to Portugal to make a statement? Would that have made a difference? We'll never know because Smith's evidence took four months to collect after that. I think the problem was that they couldn't verify the time the Smiths left Kelly's. Had they checked with Kelly's in May they may have been able to do that. They also assumed that Gerry was at the Tapas at 10pm. That fact is not proved imo.

[ShiningInLuz]

...
I think the problem was that they couldn't verify the time the Smiths left Kelly's.
...

One step at a time.  Is it possible to verify when the Smiths left Kelly's?

[Eleanor]

It doesn't put the quest for the material truth in a very good light, does it?

I don't recall a single interview in which he admitted that the other family members didn't agree (bar Martin's wife who didn't appear convinced enough to make a corroborating statement).

I can't begin to imagine how Amaral could have justified the expense to The PJ.  Although this does not mean that I think Mr. Smith was not to be trusted.  But in a Trial situation the rest of The Smith Family would have been called, which would have put paid to the entire Theory.  But then The Prosecutor would have seen that.  And no doubt Rebelo did as well.
The whole thing was a non starter, so I don't know what Amaral hoped to achieve.  But he certainly proved just how narrow minded he was.

[Carana]

I can't begin to imagine how Amaral could have justified the expense to The PJ.  Although this does not mean that I think Mr. Smith was not to be trusted.  But in a Trial situation the rest of The Smith Family would have been called, which would have put paid to the entire Theory.  But then The Prosecutor would have seen that.  And no doubt Rebelo did as well.
The whole thing was a non starter, so I don't know what Amaral hoped to achieve.  But he certainly proved just how narrow minded he was.

If the McCanns had been poor Portuguese peasants with inadequate defence, there would have been no other statements to refute it and whatever an interpreter read out to him prior to signing the Portuguese summary on the dotted line would therefore have been accepted as fact.

As it happens, Rebelo got it checked out without dragging anyone over to PT again.

[Eleanor]

If the McCanns had been poor Portuguese peasants with inadequate defence, there would have been no other statements to refute it and whatever an interpreter read out to him prior to signing the Portuguese summary on the dotted line would therefore have been accepted as fact.

As it happens, Rebelo got it checked out without dragging anyone over to PT again.

This is the scary bit because it's almost certainly true.  But at that stage Amaral seemed to be entirely unaware of how real Justice works.  Still is as far as I can see.  So I don't think his bloomer to The Press had much to do with him being taken off the case.
I would like to say that Amaral was just out of his depth, but I don't think that is true.  He knew exactly where he was going.  It worked before and was going to work again, in his mind.  In my not so humble opinion, of course.

[G-Unit]

One step at a time.  Is it possible to verify when the Smiths left Kelly's?

The staff didn't remember if they had been there or not. I haven't looked at the receipts, but even if one matched their purchases that probably only tells us when they bought the drinks, not when they left the bar.

[Carana]

This is the scary bit because it's almost certainly true.  But at that stage Amaral seemed to be entirely unaware of how real Justice works.  Still is as far as I can see.  So I don't think his bloomer to The Press had much to do with him being taken off the case.
I would like to say that Amaral was just out of his depth, but I don't think that is true.  He knew exactly where he was going.  It worked before and was going to work again, in his mind.  In my not so humble opinion, of course.

IMO, it was an increasingly embarrassing situation, quite probably with numerous internal issues to consider which may have made the situation complicated to handle.

The bloomer to the press was an undisputed professional fault handed on a platter.

[ShiningInLuz]

The staff didn't remember if they had been there or not. I haven't looked at the receipts, but even if one matched their purchases that probably only tells us when they bought the drinks, not when they left the bar.

That's why I said one step at a time.

The single staff member interviewed has a statement to the effect that she did not remember the Smiths.  I believe the statement was made in Sep 2007, so lots of chance to forget.  Plus, she appears to have been asked about the Smiths, a name that for me only triggers the notion of crisps.  She was not asked "It was quiet that night.  Do you remember a large party, of 4 adults and 5 children?"  She got asked about a surname, not exactly a stand-out situation.

Your point about when drinks were bought and when they left is well made, and well taken.

I'm still on one step at a time.  It is normal in Kelly's to have two members of staff on duty.  We have one member of staff giving a statement.  How should we proceed?

[Eleanor]

IMO, it was an increasingly embarrassing situation, quite probably with numerous internal issues to consider which may have made the situation complicated to handle.

The bloomer to the press was an undisputed professional fault handed on a platter.

Yes, it must have been complicated, putting their fingers on any one issue of incompetence because there were rather a lot and possibly minor in isolation.  So by then The PJ Hierarchy were probably looking for an excuse and didn't actually want to highlight five months of an increasing disaster, while we all sat gobsmacked by what was going on.

But I don't think Amaral or his supporters are ever going to get it.  Not that it matters anymore.  The PJ has moved on, thanks to Madeleine.  Small comfort, I know.

[Eleanor]

This is a Thread about why Amaral was taken off the case.

There is another Thread about The Smith's Sighting.  Thank You.

[Carana]

Yes, it must have been complicated, putting their fingers on any one issue of incompetence because there were rather a lot and possibly minor in isolation.  So by then The PJ Hierarchy were probably looking for an excuse and didn't actually want to highlight five months of an increasing disaster, while we all sat gobsmacked by what was going on.

But I don't think Amaral or his supporters are ever going to get it.  Not that it matters anymore.  The PJ has moved on, thanks to Madeleine.  Small comfort, I know.

Amaral seems to have been Encarnação's protégé. It's not clear how much information on the details of the case was being passed up.

If Encarnação had assured his own superiors that Amaral was doing an excellent job, there was probably not much that could be done.

Sidestepping the head of Faro may not have been an option for a variety of reasons.

[Benice]

Yes, it must have been complicated, putting their fingers on any one issue of incompetence because there were rather a lot and possibly minor in isolation.  So by then The PJ Hierarchy were probably looking for an excuse and didn't actually want to highlight five months of an increasing disaster, while we all sat gobsmacked by what was going on.

But I don't think Amaral or his supporters are ever going to get it.  Not that it matters anymore.  The PJ has moved on, thanks to Madeleine.  Small comfort, I know.

The revelation that a dream had caused the whole direction of the case to be changed - must have raised a few eyebrows amongst the PJ hierarchy.

[G-Unit]

That's why I said one step at a time.

The single staff member interviewed has a statement to the effect that she did not remember the Smiths.  I believe the statement was made in Sep 2007, so lots of chance to forget.  Plus, she appears to have been asked about the Smiths, a name that for me only triggers the notion of crisps.  She was not asked "It was quiet that night.  Do you remember a large party, of 4 adults and 5 children?"  She got asked about a surname, not exactly a stand-out situation.

Your point about when drinks were bought and when they left is well made, and well taken.

I'm still on one step at a time.  It is normal in Kelly's to have two members of staff on duty.  We have one member of staff giving a statement.  How should we proceed?

We have been told this is off topic, although it has been suggested that Amaral was removed because he was preparing to investigate the Smith sighting further in light of Mr Smith's declaration that the man he saw was Gerry McCann. Coincidentally he was removed at that moment, although it can't be shown that the two things are connected.

[Carana]

We have been told this is off topic, although it has been suggested that Amaral was removed because he was preparing to investigate the Smith sighting further in light of Mr Smith's declaration that the man he saw was Gerry McCann. Coincidentally he was removed at that moment, although it can't be shown that the two things are connected.

Why would Amaral have been taken off the case because he was negotiating for one member of a family to go back to Portugal?

Amaral managed to "forget" in his memoirs and interviews that Rebelo checked it out. Amaral could have asked for clarification, which he didn't.