Madeleine McCann - The request for satellite imagery

[Carana]

The Portuguese Police took so long to respond to this incident, can you even begin to see them getting assistance from NASA?   

I didn't think NASA had a time machine?  Maybe another myth?   

Ahhh, but the satellites were deviated that night....



Satellites deviated on the night of the crime
20 October 2009 | Posted by astro Leave a Comment

by João Mira Godinho/Paulo Marcelino

The satellite images of Praia da Luz, on the night of the 3rd of May 2007, were one of the PJ’s first concerns when the investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann started. Nonetheless, at that time, the North American authorities informed that they did not exist because the satellites had been deviated that night.

‘It was said that the two geostationary satellites [which could have images of Praia da Luz] were rotated towards the Gulf of Cadiz, where a navy exercise was taking place’, Gonçalo Amaral, the former PJ coordinator who led the case investigation, explains to Correio da Manhã.

‘It was a very serious possibility for learning who the abductor was, and more’, says Gonçalo Amaral, adding that the Judiciária wanted the images from the moment of the disappearance, but also ‘those of the hours and even days that preceded it’.

Confronted with the information that the satellites had been deviated, the PJ ended up making no formal request. ‘I have doubts that anyone else tried to access those images’, says the former PJ coordinator, questioning the reason why ‘the McCann couple, that says it is powerful, never tried to obtain the images in order to solve the mysterious disappearance’.

Contacted by Correio da Manhã yesterday, Clarence Mitchell, Kate and Gerry McCann’s spokesperson, justified that ‘the images that existed two years ago were useless’. He states that ‘if there were images, the abductor would have been caught a long time ago’ and denies any recent request from the British authorities to obtain the registers.

‘As far as we know, no diplomatic effort in that sense is being made’, the McCanns’ spokesperson asserted.

The British authorities yesterday denied that they were making any diplomatic contact in order to obtain the North American satellites’ registers.

Details

Murat sues | Robert Murat has taken the witness that pointed him out for sexually devious acts, in the Maddie process, to court.

Investigation | Clarence says that the hired private detectives continue to follow ‘strong leads’.


source: Correio da Manhã, 20.10.2009
http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2009/10/satellites-deviated-on-night-of-crime.html

[gilet]

Something not right here.

In a report of 20th October 2010 about the Satellite deviation, Goncalo Amaral says:

‘It was said that the two geostationary satellites [which could have images of Praia da Luz] were rotated towards the Gulf of Cadiz, where a navy exercise was taking place’.

and we are told that the PJ therefore made no formal request for images.



But in a transcript of an Amaral interview on 14th December 2010 we find:

P.M. - In your understanding, what could those satellite images reveal?

G.A. - They can reveal who was the person that carried the child on that night on its way to the beach. According to an Irish couple statement, with an alleged 80% certainty, it was Gerald McCann himself. That could be the confirmation of that Irish couple's statement.

P.M. - And those images exist?

G.A. - We believe that, yes. In fact, the McCann couple themselves, said, a few months ago, that they also searched for them; that they don't exist, someone else later stated that they don't exist. It's possible that the site who has divulged the cable might also be able to release those images. That would be interesting.

P.M. - In your opinion, if they exist, why weren't they yet revealed?

G.A. - Well, probably because they are a secret of state somewhere... In fact, the whole investigation was a state secret in England.


I am failing to see Amaral's logic here. He tells us they don't exist in 2009 and gives the reason for that but tells us in 2010 that they do exist and gives no reason why he has changed his mind.

Is this another discrepancy in the reporting of the case by Amaral?

[debunker]

His believing in State secrecy is verging on paranoia.

[Eleanor]

His believing in State secrecy is verging on paranoia.

He doesn't know that UK Police sign The Official Secrets Act.  In Portugal it's The PJ who decide what is Secret or not.

[gilet]

Something not right here.

In a report of 20th October 2010 about the Satellite deviation, Goncalo Amaral says:

‘It was said that the two geostationary satellites [which could have images of Praia da Luz] were rotated towards the Gulf of Cadiz, where a navy exercise was taking place’.

and we are told that the PJ therefore made no formal request for images.



But in a transcript of an Amaral interview on 14th December 2010 we find:

P.M. - In your understanding, what could those satellite images reveal?

G.A. - They can reveal who was the person that carried the child on that night on its way to the beach. According to an Irish couple statement, with an alleged 80% certainty, it was Gerald McCann himself. That could be the confirmation of that Irish couple's statement.

P.M. - And those images exist?

G.A. - We believe that, yes. In fact, the McCann couple themselves, said, a few months ago, that they also searched for them; that they don't exist, someone else later stated that they don't exist. It's possible that the site who has divulged the cable might also be able to release those images. That would be interesting.

P.M. - In your opinion, if they exist, why weren't they yet revealed?

G.A. - Well, probably because they are a secret of state somewhere... In fact, the whole investigation was a state secret in England.


I am failing to see Amaral's logic here. He tells us they don't exist in 2009 and gives the reason for that but tells us in 2010 that they do exist and gives no reason why he has changed his mind.

Is this another discrepancy in the reporting of the case by Amaral?

Just another clunky translation I expect. 

That could be the excuse. In which case they should ask Astro and Joana Morais for an explanation as to why they are making the errors in the translations as they are the responsible parties. Are they deliberately trying to make Amaral look foolish or is he doing it himself and the translations are fine? We need to be told.

[John]

The chances of any satellite having any images which would have been of any use are so minuscule as to be a non starter.  Even if there had been a satellite available that night NASA would have had to had several hours notice and that I am afraid was impossible.  Another myth for the boiling pot eh?

[gilet]

That's not necessarily true. Had there been satellite images of the area, a retrospective trawl through them might have revealed some clues. Perhaps a car in an odd position? Its highly unlikely though that such a retrospective look would have revealed anything as significant as a car number plate or a clear view of any individual or what they were carrying. Unless there had been advance warning I doubt that any images of such a remote and non-military area would have been that revealing.

What does still puzzle me is why, when Amaral clearly knew on 20th October 2009** that the satellites had not been in position over PDL he comes out a year later with the claim that the images exist and they could pinpoint an individual? Was he just forgetful or what?

** ^{I have just noticed an error in an earlier post of mine. The date of the quotation about Amaral claiming that the satellites were rotated towards the Gulf of Cadiz was from October 2009, not October 2010. I won't go back to correct it as it has been quoted.}

[C.Edwards]

It does make me laugh how you lot think that every operational bit of knowledge is released in either the media or police interviews. You obviously have no knowledge of the level of monitoring equipment on the American spy satellites which can, indeed, read the headlines of newspapers on the ground as long as there is good lighting and clear conditions.  Obviously at 10pm on a May night they'd have been less useful but may have revealed information about the movements of the relevant players during the day.  There isn't just one satellite that pootles about the sky taking snapshots of whatever falls beneath it.

Anyhow, irrelevant now anyway.  It is an education to see the way you all circle jerk yourselves into a frenzy, it's like watching a pair of grannies discussing tabloid headlines at a bingo evening.

"Ooh Mavis, look - that Jordan has got married again"
"Ooh I know, they say she has basketballs implanted now!"
"Well I never. I must tell the grandchildren"

etc. and so are pro myths born.

[debunker]

It does make me laugh how you lot think that every operational bit of knowledge is released in either the media or police interviews. You obviously have no knowledge of the level of monitoring equipment on the American spy satellites which can, indeed, read the headlines of newspapers on the ground as long as there is good lighting and clear conditions.  Obviously at 10pm on a May night they'd have been less useful but may have revealed information about the movements of the relevant players during the day.  There isn't just one satellite that pootles about the sky taking snapshots of whatever falls beneath it.

Anyhow, irrelevant now anyway.  It is an education to see the way you all circle jerk yourselves into a frenzy, it's like watching a pair of grannies discussing tabloid headlines at a bingo evening.

"Ooh Mavis, look - that Jordan has got married again"
"Ooh I know, they say she has basketballs implanted now!"

"Well I never. I must tell the grandchildren"

etc. and so are pro myths born.

The same accusation can be made about the anti side.

Some of us criticise such silly dissection aimed at increasing the poolof information. You will notice that my interventions are usually aimed at stressing how little we know and how little there is to be known.

[C.Edwards]

The same accusation can be made about the anti side.

Some of us criticise such silly dissection aimed at increasing the poolof information. You will notice that my interventions are usually aimed at stressing how little we know and how little there is to be known.

Most of your interventions are to call doubters "[ censored word ]s", "[ censored word ]s", "crazy" or any combination of the three.  You also dance around requesting evidence to back up points (not a bad thing in itself) but it's laughably one-sidedly aimed at the anti-flavoured posts.  You let all sorts of pro crap drift by without a word.

At least I have the honesty to declare I'm an anti, albeit a more moderate one than some.

[Angelo222]

To be of any use the satellite camera would have to have been zoomed in on PDL.  Even if one of the military satellites just happened to be over southern Portugal at the time that Madeleine was abducted there was no reason for it to to recording images in that particular area.  Amaral's suggestion therefore that a satellite would be of any use to the investigation is just pie in the sky.   

[stephen25000]

It does make me laugh how you lot think that every operational bit of knowledge is released in either the media or police interviews. You obviously have no knowledge of the level of monitoring equipment on the American spy satellites which can, indeed, read the headlines of newspapers on the ground as long as there is good lighting and clear conditions.  Obviously at 10pm on a May night they'd have been less useful but may have revealed information about the movements of the relevant players during the day.  There isn't just one satellite that pootles about the sky taking snapshots of whatever falls beneath it.

Anyhow, irrelevant now anyway.  It is an education to see the way you all circle jerk yourselves into a frenzy, it's like watching a pair of grannies discussing tabloid headlines at a bingo evening.

"Ooh Mavis, look - that Jordan has got married again"
"Ooh I know, they say she has basketballs implanted now!"

"Well I never. I must tell the grandchildren"

etc. and so are pro myths born.

The same accusation can be made about the anti side.

Some of us criticise such silly dissection aimed at increasing the poolof information. You will notice that my interventions are usually aimed at stressing how little we know and how little there is to be known.

Words are easy, but your criticism and openly abusive terminology is directed at the '[ censored word]' or the equivalent.

That is why you are only believed by the supporters of the Mccanns as being 'neutral'.

[C.Edwards]

To be of any use the satellite camera would have to have been zoomed in on PDL.  Even if one of the military satellites just happened to be over southern Portugal at the time that Madeleine was abducted there was no reason for it to to recording images in that particular area.  Amaral's suggestion therefore that a satellite would be of any use to the investigation is just pie in the sky.

No, the satellites don't need to be "zoomed in".  We're not in 1980 anymore.

[Angelo222]

It does make me laugh how you lot think that every operational bit of knowledge is released in either the media or police interviews. You obviously have no knowledge of the level of monitoring equipment on the American spy satellites which can, indeed, read the headlines of newspapers on the ground as long as there is good lighting and clear conditions.  Obviously at 10pm on a May night they'd have been less useful but may have revealed information about the movements of the relevant players during the day.  There isn't just one satellite that pootles about the sky taking snapshots of whatever falls beneath it.

Anyhow, irrelevant now anyway.  It is an education to see the way you all circle jerk yourselves into a frenzy, it's like watching a pair of grannies discussing tabloid headlines at a bingo evening.

"Ooh Mavis, look - that Jordan has got married again"
"Ooh I know, they say she has basketballs implanted now!"
"Well I never. I must tell the grandchildren"

etc. and so are pro myths born.

You obviously enjoy perpetuating the myth that the satellites see everything that is beneath them and in fine detail.  Afraid atmospherics in most cases only allows so much detail to be seen from such a great height regardless of the lens being used.  You shouldn't believe all you see in James Bond movies.       

[stephen25000]

It does make me laugh how you lot think that every operational bit of knowledge is released in either the media or police interviews. You obviously have no knowledge of the level of monitoring equipment on the American spy satellites which can, indeed, read the headlines of newspapers on the ground as long as there is good lighting and clear conditions.  Obviously at 10pm on a May night they'd have been less useful but may have revealed information about the movements of the relevant players during the day.  There isn't just one satellite that pootles about the sky taking snapshots of whatever falls beneath it.

Anyhow, irrelevant now anyway.  It is an education to see the way you all circle jerk yourselves into a frenzy, it's like watching a pair of grannies discussing tabloid headlines at a bingo evening.

"Ooh Mavis, look - that Jordan has got married again"
"Ooh I know, they say she has basketballs implanted now!"
"Well I never. I must tell the grandchildren"

etc. and so are pro myths born.

You obviously enjoy perpetuating the myth that the satellites see everything that is beneath them and in fine detail.  Afraid atmospherics in most cases only allows so much detail to be seen from such a great height regardless of the lens being used.  You shouldn't believe all you see in James Bond movies.       

You are aware of course that satellite technology is not confined solely to the visible spectrum ?


Then of course we have Tanner with X-ray vision.