Do The McCanns Trust Operation Grange to Do the Job ?

[debunker]

Challenge for you Debunker...you claim the AG didn't infer they lied...please prove it...CITE  ??   

No. The original asserter needs to prove it. They need to bring the original statement in Portuguese to the site rather than an inadequate translation by an amateur. The Portuguese word for lying does not appear in the original.

And no one claimed the word 'lied' was used. The meaning of the words that were used by the AG mean exactly that however.

Your post above:

"The AG also said the McCanns had lied about how often they checked on their children and that, by not taking part in he reconstruction, they had also failed to prove their innocence. Do you also agree with him on these points ?"

So have I claimed the word 'lied' was used in the dispatch ? The AG's words, however, carry the same meaning.

CIte for an accurate translation. If he did not use the word 'lie', what word did he use. The truth of the matter is that you do not know, so assume the worst for the McCanns as is your bias and the bias of the translators- this comes up time and again!.

If you want to insist that the AG said the McCanns lied (or anything close to it), please produce the original document.

And producing the original document would move the debate forward how ? You can't speak Portuguese so unless you are going bring a reputable, human,  translator, acceptable to both sides, to translate it, what would be the point ?

It would enable people to see that the Portuguese word for lying is not in the sentence.

If you do insist that the AJ called the McCanns liars, provide the information please. Else we shall have to conclude that you are lying (or mistaken!)

[faithlilly]

Faithlilly, how do you know the AG meant "they lied" and not "they were mistaken"?  Do you know the difference between lying and giving wrong information based on inaccurate recall?

Are you really suggesting the McCanns were 'mistaken in their recall' when declaring they had left the children for only 30 minutes when they had actually left them for over an hour ?

If they habitually checked every half-hour throughout the week and said so to the police, but on one or two occasions the gap between checks was actually longer does that make them liars?  I know it does in your book, but in the eyes of the PT AG I suspect it does not.

You suspect ? The AG's opinion is clear, categorical and not changed by your 'suspicions'.

[debunker]

Faithlilly, how do you know the AG meant "they lied" and not "they were mistaken"?  Do you know the difference between lying and giving wrong information based on inaccurate recall?

Are you really suggesting the McCanns were 'mistaken in their recall' when declaring they had left the children for only 30 minutes when they had actually left them for over an hour ?

If they habitually checked every half-hour throughout the week and said so to the police, but on one or two occasions the gap between checks was actually longer does that make them liars?  I know it does in your book, but in the eyes of the PT AG I suspect it does not.

You suspect ? The AG's opinion is clear, categorical and not changed by your 'suspicions'.

Perhaps you can produce the original report? No, I thought not!

[DCI]

You will be telling me next that there is a translation problem with Mrs Fenn too and she was English.  She knew what she heard and she also knew when the patio door beneath her apartment opened and closed and the crying stopped.  Over an hour she said and was concerned enough to telephone her friend for advice as to what to do??  As a parent I find this appalling behaviour by the parents of young children and what makes it worse is that they are both qualified medical doctors who should have know better.

Well something is not right, either the translation is wrong, or Mrs Fenn was lying?

Yes, Mrs Fenn was English, but didn't speak or read the Portuguese language. It seems she knew what she heard, but didn't know what she said in her statement. The statement she contradicted the day after, when speaking on camera. So which statement do you believe, Angelo?

[Angelo222]

The AG inferred that they were economical with the truth as to how the children were monitored and other matters and in English this translates as they lied.  Simple logic easily understood.

If you start picking holes in statements you might as well challenge the integrity of the entire police investigation because where does it end??

[debunker]

The AG inferred that they were economical with the truth as to how the children were monitored and other matters and in English this translates as they lied.  Simple logic easily understood.

Inferring that they were economical with the truth is not proof that he said that they were lying.

Since no-one else can be bothered, I will post the original


http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P17/17_VOLUME_XVIIa_Page_4642.jpg


Second full paragraph, but needs to be read in context with the paragraphs around it.

[sadie]

What was wrong with the way they checked Angelo?

They said every half hour and it seems every half hour.  The same ae at holiday resorts around the world for decades

Why should the AG say that, I wonder >@@(*&)




Could he have been doing a damage limitation exercise cos of the mess Amaral had made of it? >@@(*&)

[faithlilly]

Challenge for you Debunker...you claim the AG didn't infer they lied...please prove it...CITE  ??   

No. The original asserter needs to prove it. They need to bring the original statement in Portuguese to the site rather than an inadequate translation by an amateur. The Portuguese word for lying does not appear in the original.

And no one claimed the word 'lied' was used. The meaning of the words that were used by the AG mean exactly that however.

Your post above:

"The AG also said the McCanns had lied about how often they checked on their children and that, by not taking part in he reconstruction, they had also failed to prove their innocence. Do you also agree with him on these points ?"

So have I claimed the word 'lied' was used in the dispatch ? The AG's words, however, carry the same meaning.

CIte for an accurate translation. If he did not use the word 'lie', what word did he use. The truth of the matter is that you do not know, so assume the worst for the McCanns as is your bias and the bias of the translators- this comes up time and again!.

If you want to insist that the AG said the McCanns lied (or anything close to it), please produce the original document.

And producing the original document would move the debate forward how ? You can't speak Portuguese so unless you are going bring a reputable, human,  translator, acceptable to both sides, to translate it, what would be the point ?

It would enable people to see that the Portuguese word for lying is not in the sentence.

If you do insist that the AJ called the McCanns liars, provide the information please. Else we shall have to conclude that you are lying (or mistaken!)

We have no been around the houses quite enough debunker so for clarification the AG stated the McCanns were untruthful regarding the checking of their children, therefore they lied. While he was much to polite to be quite so pointed that is what his words amounted to. That, because of senility or simple obtuseness, you refuse to take that on board is your problem and yours alone.

[faithlilly]

The AG inferred that they were economical with the truth as to how the children were monitored and other matters and in English this translates as they lied.  Simple logic easily understood.

Inferring that they were economical with the truth is not proof that he said that they were lying.

Since no-one else can be bothered, I will post the original


http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P17/17_VOLUME_XVIIa_Page_4642.jpg


Second full paragraph, but needs to be read in context with the paragraphs around it.

Please post your translation debunker so we can all see clearly the point you are trying to make.

[John]

The translation as far as I can establish certainly appears to state that the parents were not doing their checks as claimed by them.

Translated verbatim it states...

"This denotes that the parents were not persistently worried with the children, that they would not make their verification as then stated, before neglected, although not rashly, nor grossly, the duty to guard the same children.

If such duty of care had been observed, on the assumption that it was a kidnapping, as insistently if said and continues to say and is permissible, that is what has happened to their occurrence could have been poisoned."

The Report goes on to state that had the checks been carried out as claimed by the parents then the kidnapping would have been frustrated and could not have occurred.

[ferryman]

The prosecutors were generally sound, but didn't get everything right.

This is, perhaps, a useful blog on checks:

http://madeleine-writingthewrongs.info/checks-on-the-children-the-mccanns-achilles-heel/

[debunker]

Challenge for you Debunker...you claim the AG didn't infer they lied...please prove it...CITE  ??   

No. The original asserter needs to prove it. They need to bring the original statement in Portuguese to the site rather than an inadequate translation by an amateur. The Portuguese word for lying does not appear in the original.

And no one claimed the word 'lied' was used. The meaning of the words that were used by the AG mean exactly that however.

Your post above:

"The AG also said the McCanns had lied about how often they checked on their children and that, by not taking part in he reconstruction, they had also failed to prove their innocence. Do you also agree with him on these points ?"

So have I claimed the word 'lied' was used in the dispatch ? The AG's words, however, carry the same meaning.

CIte for an accurate translation. If he did not use the word 'lie', what word did he use. The truth of the matter is that you do not know, so assume the worst for the McCanns as is your bias and the bias of the translators- this comes up time and again!.

If you want to insist that the AG said the McCanns lied (or anything close to it), please produce the original document.

And producing the original document would move the debate forward how ? You can't speak Portuguese so unless you are going bring a reputable, human,  translator, acceptable to both sides, to translate it, what would be the point ?

It would enable people to see that the Portuguese word for lying is not in the sentence.

If you do insist that the AJ called the McCanns liars, provide the information please. Else we shall have to conclude that you are lying (or mistaken!)

We have no been around the houses quite enough debunker so for clarification the AG stated the McCanns were untruthful regarding the checking of their children, therefore they lied. While he was much to polite to be quite so pointed that is what his words amounted to. That, because of senility or simple obtuseness, you refuse to take that on board is your problem and yours alone.

It is quite possible to be untruthful without telling lies.

If you wish to amend your allegation to the much softer suggestion that tehy may have been in error over the facts, then that is closer to the original.

The AG does not say that they lied.

[faithlilly]

The prosecutors were generally sound, but didn't get everything right.

This is, perhaps, a useful blog on checks:

http://madeleine-writingthewrongs.info/checks-on-the-children-the-mccanns-achilles-heel/

Would I be right in assuming that the things the AG didn't get right are the ones that paint the McCanns in a bad light ?

[debunker]

The AG inferred that they were economical with the truth as to how the children were monitored and other matters and in English this translates as they lied.  Simple logic easily understood.

Inferring that they were economical with the truth is not proof that he said that they were lying.

Since no-one else can be bothered, I will post the original

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P17/17_VOLUME_XVIIa_Page_4642.jpg

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P17/17_VOLUME_XVIIa_Page_4642.jpg


Second full paragraph, but needs to be read in context with the paragraphs around it.

Please post your translation debunker so we can all see clearly the point you are trying to make.

My Portuguese is not good enough to do a translation, but is good enough to not find the Portuguese word for 'lies'.

[faithlilly]

Challenge for you Debunker...you claim the AG didn't infer they lied...please prove it...CITE  ??   

No. The original asserter needs to prove it. They need to bring the original statement in Portuguese to the site rather than an inadequate translation by an amateur. The Portuguese word for lying does not appear in the original.

And no one claimed the word 'lied' was used. The meaning of the words that were used by the AG mean exactly that however.

Your post above:

"The AG also said the McCanns had lied about how often they checked on their children and that, by not taking part in he reconstruction, they had also failed to prove their innocence. Do you also agree with him on these points ?"

So have I claimed the word 'lied' was used in the dispatch ? The AG's words, however, carry the same meaning.

CIte for an accurate translation. If he did not use the word 'lie', what word did he use. The truth of the matter is that you do not know, so assume the worst for the McCanns as is your bias and the bias of the translators- this comes up time and again!.

If you want to insist that the AG said the McCanns lied (or anything close to it), please produce the original document.

And producing the original document would move the debate forward how ? You can't speak Portuguese so unless you are going bring a reputable, human,  translator, acceptable to both sides, to translate it, what would be the point ?

It would enable people to see that the Portuguese word for lying is not in the sentence.

If you do insist that the AJ called the McCanns liars, provide the information please. Else we shall have to conclude that you are lying (or mistaken!)

We have no been around the houses quite enough debunker so for clarification the AG stated the McCanns were untruthful regarding the checking of their children, therefore they lied. While he was much to polite to be quite so pointed that is what his words amounted to. That, because of senility or simple obtuseness, you refuse to take that on board is your problem and yours alone.

It is quite possible to be untruthful without telling lies.

If you wish to amend your allegation to the much softer suggestion that tehy may have been in error over the facts, then that is closer to the original.

The AG does not say that they lied.

The AG implies that they were knowingly untruthful. That is the difference.