"Says Clarence Mitchell, spokesman for the McCanns: “We hope the Portuguese police will be liaising with the Spanish police to establish this man’s movements around the time Madeleine disappeared.
“We have no indication there is a direct link between the two cases. But given the proximity of the places Madeleine and Mari Luz disappeared from and the similarity in their ages, we believe it’s important the Portuguese police make absolutely sure there’s no connection now there’s been an arrest.”"
I am sure the police were eternally grateful for the spin doctor telling them what they should do !
I wonder on what definition of "proximity" he relies? close on 200 klicks and two and a bit hours in another country. Sounds like a bit of kidology.
"Says Clarence Mitchell, spokesman for the McCanns: “We hope the Portuguese police will be liaising with the Spanish police to establish this man’s movements around the time Madeleine disappeared.It might sound a long way from PdL but what was he doing at the time? Was he on holiday?
“We have no indication there is a direct link between the two cases. But given the proximity of the places Madeleine and Mari Luz disappeared from and the similarity in their ages, we believe it’s important the Portuguese police make absolutely sure there’s no connection now there’s been an arrest.”"
I am sure the police were eternally grateful for the spin doctor telling them what they should do !
I wonder on what definition of "proximity" he relies? close on 200 klicks and two and a bit hours in another country. Sounds like a bit of kidology.
Robert Black had victims in England, Ireland & Scotland & was suspected in other cases on mainland Europe. Why not suspect Madeleine's & Mari's cases could be linked until proved otherwise?
I am objecting to the misuse of the English language in misdirection and misinformation.
What would have been wrong with saying it's only two hours away and near enough on the same road.
proximity
/prɒkˈsɪmɪti/
noun
noun: proximity
nearness in space, time, or relationship.
Judge for yourself; is 200km near in space? and is two hours near in time?
Mr Mitchell also once said about a run, K & G are running for the Madeleine Fund and other charities.
I am objecting to the misuse of the English language in misdirection and misinformation.If an asteroid missed colliding with the Earth by 200 km that would be a very near miss indeed. @)(++(*
What would have been wrong with saying it's only two hours away and near enough on the same road.
proximity
/prɒkˈsɪmɪti/
noun
noun: proximity
nearness in space, time, or relationship.
Judge for yourself; is 200km near in space? and is two hours near in time?
Mr Mitchell also once said about a run, K & G are running for the Madeleine Fund and other charities.
Robert Black had victims in England, Ireland & Scotland & was suspected in other cases on mainland Europe. Why not suspect Madeleine's & Mari's cases could be linked until proved otherwise?
A sizeable asteroid passing by at 200 km would be very very close indeed.One is enough, I think. Mari Luz is the little girl who was missing later found dead.
Another one hard to believe is this "DAILY STAR: “MADDIE COPS PROBE LINK TO SNATCH GIRL”
“Police in Portugal were last night investigating whether the fiend who snatched a five-year-old girl in Spain also took Madeleine McCann. Guilhermino Encarnacao, a key member of the Maddie squad, was drafted in to join the hunt for little Mari Lui Cortes” – Not to be confused with Mari Luz Cortes"
http://www.anorak.co.uk/179483/madeleine-mccann/madeleine-mccann-mari-luz-cortes-maddy-2-and-gerry-mccann-writes.html
Were there two missing girls "Mari Lui Cortes" and "Mari Luz Cortes"?
"Madeleine McCann: Mari Luz Cortes, Santiago del Valle Garcia And Clarence Mitchell Says"
http://www.anorak.co.uk/182448/madeleine-mccann/madeleine-mccann-mari-luz-cortes-santiago-del-valle-garcia-and-clarence-mitchell-says.html
Is it true they printed thousands of posters?
"The 52-year-old convicted paedophile was arrested late yesterday on suspicion of killing Mari Luz Cortes, the five-year-old whose disappearance was initially linked to Madeleine’s.
The McCanns printed thousands of posters with pictures of their daughter and Mari Luz on them in a bid to solve the two cases.
The cases were not linked by everyone. Juan Jose Cortes, the girl’s father said at the time: “We don’t think it’s appropriate to relate one thing with the other, because they are two distinct cases, two different countries and two different lines of investigation. Nobody asked us anything.”
How did they print these" How did they get rid of them?
I am objecting to the misuse of the English language in misdirection and misinformation.
What would have been wrong with saying it's only two hours away and near enough on the same road.
proximity
/prɒkˈsɪmɪti/
noun
noun: proximity
nearness in space, time, or relationship.
Judge for yourself; is 200km near in space? and is two hours near in time?
Mr Mitchell also once said about a run, K & G are running for the Madeleine Fund and other charities.
To quote a very clever chap...It's all relative
Very similar to linking a disappearance in Preston to one in Glasgow, for example, even though the details were quite different.
It's a matter of opinion to believe the two cases may be linked... A, proper police investigation would look at all possibilities ...Preston to Glasgow is 300 km
The two children differed in age and colouring. One was alleged to have been taken from her bed, the other from the street. One was on holiday, the other in familiar surroundings. One was English, the other Spanish/Gypsy The parents were quite different. I wonder what the similarities were?
The two children differed in age and colouring. One was alleged to have been taken from her bed, the other from the street. One was on holiday, the other in familiar surroundings. One was English, the other Spanish/Gypsy The parents were quite different. I wonder what the similarities were?Some of us think Madeleine was out on the street too.
The two children differed in age and colouring. One was alleged to have been taken from her bed, the other from the street. One was on holiday, the other in familiar surroundings. One was English, the other Spanish/Gypsy The parents were quite different. I wonder what the similarities were?
They were both on the Iberian Peninsula.
The outcomes were different too.
Not necessarily unless you know what happened to Maddie...then theres Joanna
It appears that Mari Luz Cortes was taken by a local man from the village where she lived and would have known Mari. I can't see that man being local to Praia Da Luz as well Davel. If it was another local man from PDL then the cases are not linked.
From the Anorak link
The arrested man is a former neighbour of Mari Luz’s family and lived less than 100 yards from her parents Juan Jose and Irene on the route the youngster would have taken as she returned from a local sweet shop.
He had already been quizzed by police before his arrest yesterday after arousing the suspicion of locals by leaving Huelva with his wife the day after Mari Luz disappeared…
The two children differed in age and colouring. One was alleged to have been taken from her bed, the other from the street. One was on holiday, the other in familiar surroundings. One was English, the other Spanish/Gypsy The parents were quite different. I wonder what the similarities were?They were both very young girls. To a paedophile with a predlictition for very young girls the rest of the stuff you mention is pretty irrelevant IMO.
The outcomes were different too.
Yes well there was problems at the time of writing this article
http://truthformadeleine.com/2008/02/fury-over-kate-and-gerry-mccann-using-photograph-of-missing-mari-luz-cortes/
"The father of five-year old Mari Luz Cortes, who disappeared in January, said he had not given the couple permission to use his daughter’s picture in 17,400 A3-size prints distributed across Spain and Portugal yesterday."
I was surprised at the number of posters printed up. The easy thing is to print them but what do you do with them then.
There were also posters printed on behalf of Madeleine McCann ~ Mari Luz Cortes ~ and Yeremi Vargas showing pictures of all three missing children as well as the ones printed showing only Madeleine and Mari Luz.
The McCanns were publicising all three missing children.
They have met a lot of opposition throughout the time they have been campaigning on Madeleine's behalf and in my opinion it indicates there is someone out there who just doesn't want her to be found and who thinks nothing of causing as much disruption to their efforts as possible.(http://www.n-tv.pt/files/2018/01/1108521_A101-12054119_WEB.jpg)
How anyone could deface the poster of a missing child is utterly beyond my comprehension.
No matter their feelings about her parents, it was in my opinion a despicable act.
That's because you believe she was abducted. Just suppose she wasn't and the posters were some kind of a ploy? How despicable would that be?If there was any evidence maybe it would be justified, but not just on suspicion.
That's because you believe she was abducted. Just suppose she wasn't and the posters were some kind of a ploy? How despicable would that be?
That's because you believe she was abducted. Just suppose she wasn't and the posters were some kind of a ploy? How despicable would that be?
That's because you believe she was abducted. Just suppose she wasn't and the posters were some kind of a ploy? How despicable would that be?You think in such a scenario it would be acceptable to throw paint over the picture of a missing innocent child?
You may wish to excuse the despicable behaviour of defacing a child's face by suggesting that some had the right to do so because they may have believed the " posters were some kind of ploy", however I would question the integrity and morals of anyone who would choose to make such a protest.
How anyone could deface the poster of a missing child is utterly beyond my comprehension.
No matter their feelings about her parents, it was in my opinion a despicable act.
You may wish to excuse the despicable behaviour of defacing a child's face by suggesting that some had the right to do so because they may have believed the " posters were some kind of ploy", however I would question the integrity and morals of anyone who would choose to make such a protest.
I haven't had my livelyhood ruined, lost my job, and had the reputation of my village dragged through the mud so I can't answer.
I haven't had my livelyhood ruined, lost my job, and had the reputation of my village dragged through the mud so I can't answer.
Who had their livelyhood ruined... Luz must have done very well out of the hundreds of journalist visiting... Many employees would have been on seasonal contracts....
Could you give cites for your claim
I had noticed that name "Yeremi Vargas" before but had not read up on it.Yeremi vanished from Gran Canaraia just before Madeleine and I well remember pinning up Missing Madeleine posters alongside Yeremis poster, whilst hoidaying in Tenerife. Lovley face he had. Do hope that he is found.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7397767.stm
This sentence really brings home the problem
""I called him in for lunch and he nodded and said he'd be there in a moment," she says.
"I remember it like it was yesterday. I remember exactly what he was wearing. Five minutes - it couldn't have been more than five minutes, I put my head round the door and he was gone.""
Whatever happened that night, it wounded Luz’s reputation as a quiet, family-friendly resort. It had a “very negative” effect, said Mr Mata: for two years after her disappearance, the number of tourists “noticeably decreased”. “People lost their jobs because of this. A lot of shops and restaurants closed down. It had a huge influence on the real estate market
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/03/just-had-enough-ten-years-praia-da-luz-remembers-night-madeleine/
Wasn't there something about a global economic crisis beginning sometime in 2008? I seem to recall it had quite a devastating effect as people worldwide lost homes, jobs, businesses ... am I wrong, and that only happened in Luz?
Wan't there something about a global economic crisis beginning sometime in 2008? I seem to recall it had quite a devastating effect as people worldwide lost homes, jobs, businesses ... am I wrong, and that only happened in Luz?
You may wish to excuse the despicable behaviour of defacing a child's face by suggesting that some had the right to do so because they may have believed the " posters were some kind of ploy", however I would question the integrity and morals of anyone who would choose to make such a protest.
From the same link.
Mr Mata, who is now president of the village council, said residents were initially sympathetic towards the McCanns. “In the beginning, people were very friendly and everybody tried to help,” he said. “But then it turned into a negative thing for the village. People think we helped so much and our lives were so disturbed by this and even today we don’t know what happened.”
The global crash would have hurt Praia Da Luz but the Madeleine disappearance would have exacerbated it immensely as it lost it's family friendly image in one night, all IMO.
Maddie and her family lost far more
Theirs was self inflicted. Their negligence has caused widespread suffering on an innocent village and possibly even an entire country IMO.
I have every care and respect for Madeleine and the twins. They too were innocent in all this.
Does this high minded stance extend to the defiling of hoardings in general or just this particular one?
It could be worse. I have "done jobs" in 21st century in places where a hoarding would be used for target practice pretty well as soon as it was erected.
Hoardings have been a target in UK since I was a boy.
What's new?
Anyone who cannot see the difference between vandalizing, say, a wonderbra advert hoarding and one featuring the face of a little girl who may have been abducted (an act of vandalism which also deliberately obscured the phone line set up to receive information on her possible whereabouts) is beyond help IMO.
No my " high minded stance" is actually extended to not only defilng a poster depicting the face of a missing little girl.but to all acts of vandalism.
Fortunately I haven't seen many hoardings being used for "target practice".
I find it particularly loathsome for any child's image to be vandalised in such a manner.
I'm surprised you do not!
A sizeable asteroid passing by at 200 km would be very very close indeed.
Another one hard to believe is this "DAILY STAR: “MADDIE COPS PROBE LINK TO SNATCH GIRL”
“Police in Portugal were last night investigating whether the fiend who snatched a five-year-old girl in Spain also took Madeleine McCann. Guilhermino Encarnacao, a key member of the Maddie squad, was drafted in to join the hunt for little Mari Lui Cortes” – Not to be confused with Mari Luz Cortes"
http://www.anorak.co.uk/179483/madeleine-mccann/madeleine-mccann-mari-luz-cortes-maddy-2-and-gerry-mccann-writes.html
Were there two missing girls "Mari Lui Cortes" and "Mari Luz Cortes"?
Whatever happened that night, it wounded Luz’s reputation as a quiet, family-friendly resort. It had a “very negative” effect, said Mr Mata: for two years after her disappearance, the number of tourists “noticeably decreased”. “People lost their jobs because of this. A lot of shops and restaurants closed down. It had a huge influence on the real estate market
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/03/just-had-enough-ten-years-praia-da-luz-remembers-night-madeleine/
No my " high minded stance" is actually extended to not only defilng a poster depicting the face of a missing little girl.but to all acts of vandalism.
Fortunately I haven't seen many hoardings being used for "target practice".
I find it particularly loathsome for any child's image to be vandalised in such a manner.
I'm surprised you do not!
How much did the 2007-2008 financial crisis contribute to a relative lack of UK visitors? Or perhaps the McCanns triggered that as well?
Or perhaps the financial crisis' effects were exacerbated by the widespread amount of negative publicity that the village of Praia Da Luz received for at least 18 months following Madeleine's disappearance.
It seems you are relying on the testimony of one man in a newspaper article... Not reliable evidence
Am I davel? There was a link to a video of the cleaner who lost her job following Madeleine's disappearance and there is a lot more for those who can be bothered to search. More to the point just what are you and the fellow supporters relying on when you seem to say that the Madeleine case had no effect on Praia Da Luz. Do you have any reliable evidence?
No reliable evidence either way... The work was seasonal so jobs would have been temporary... Do you have a cite for the cleaner.So Vitor dos Santos, Head of Accommodation, 18 years at the OC, was made permanently redundant because his job was 'seasonal'?
So Vitor dos Santos, Head of Accommodation, 18 years at the OC, was made permanently redundant because his job was 'seasonal'?
Silvia Batista?
Her husband?
You are spreading misinformation.
Provide evidence to support your claim... Otherwise it's gossip
I see you haven't share anything about all being well, in a financial sense in Praia Da Luz following Madeleine's disappearance.
How about this to show that all was NOT well.
The holiday company at the centre of the Madeleine McCann disappearance has launched a legal action against its insurers to recover lost earnings.
Mark Warner says holidaymakers stayed away from its Praia da Luz resort in Portugal because of the huge media coverage of the disappearance of Madeleine, then aged three, almost two years ago.
The firm filed the writ in the high court seeking compensation from AIG, the big US insurance company, which has had to be bailed out by the US government.
Although the writ has yet to be made public, the Guardian understands that the claim will centre around losses from "interrupted business", normally used to cover businesses that can no longer trade because of flooding or loss of power supplies. AIG is expected to contest the claim.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2009/apr/04/madeleine-mcann-disappearance-holiday-resort
Not all of the writ was concerning Praia Da Luz but some was. So there was economic loss in the village thanks to Madeleine going missing.
I do not recall articulating that as my opinion. Please show where I did.
The message I was conveying quite clearly was that acts of vandalism on hoardings have been carried out for many years possibly generations. It happens, but it remains a quantum leap to attribute them to reasons of prejudice unless you know who did it, then stick the thumbscrews on to find out why. Otherwise you are merely attributing it to groups and reasons that suit your purpose. As many of these acts of vandalism are perpetrated by children anyway you could scarcely be too harsh on them could you? Well not if you wish to maintain the higher moral ground.
If you have not seen hoardings used for target practice you must be very young and not particularly well travelled.
Am I davel? There was a link to a video of the cleaner who lost her job following Madeleine's disappearance and there is a lot more for those who can be bothered to search. More to the point just what are you and the fellow supporters relying on when you seem to say that the Madeleine case had no effect on Praia Da Luz. Do you have any reliable evidence?
Am i remembering correctly?
Didn't Luz, past member on here, publicly brag about defacing the posters?
Expensive large bus posters attacked, posters painted over and torn up
There was absolute outrage at his actions on here at the time
That, Alice was not the work of children, it was too thorough and well organised
is unclear how far the company's profits were hit by the affair. Its latest accounts show that it made a loss of £2.8m in the year up to October 2007, on a turnover of £46m. It blamed the loss in part to Madeleine's disappearance, saying: "The results for the year reflect the difficult trading conditions experienced by certain parts of the tour operating industry."
This is from the same article... It also says business was bouyant in the summer of 2007
Could you provide a cite that the writ covered losses in PDL...apart from the OC
I see you haven't share anything about all being well, in a financial sense in Praia Da Luz following Madeleine's disappearance.
How about this to show that all was NOT well.
The holiday company at the centre of the Madeleine McCann disappearance has launched a legal action against its insurers to recover lost earnings.
Mark Warner says holidaymakers stayed away from its Praia da Luz resort in Portugal because of the huge media coverage of the disappearance of Madeleine, then aged three, almost two years ago.
The firm filed the writ in the high court seeking compensation from AIG, the big US insurance company, which has had to be bailed out by the US government.
Although the writ has yet to be made public, the Guardian understands that the claim will centre around losses from "interrupted business", normally used to cover businesses that can no longer trade because of flooding or loss of power supplies. AIG is expected to contest the claim.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2009/apr/04/madeleine-mcann-disappearance-holiday-resort
Not all of the writ was concerning Praia Da Luz but some was. So there was economic loss in the village thanks to Madeleine going missing.
I see you haven't share anything about all being well, in a financial sense in Praia Da Luz following Madeleine's disappearance.They put in a claim but did they get paid out? I have not seen evidence suggesting they were compensated.
How about this to show that all was NOT well.
The holiday company at the centre of the Madeleine McCann disappearance has launched a legal action against its insurers to recover lost earnings.
Mark Warner says holidaymakers stayed away from its Praia da Luz resort in Portugal because of the huge media coverage of the disappearance of Madeleine, then aged three, almost two years ago.
The firm filed the writ in the high court seeking compensation from AIG, the big US insurance company, which has had to be bailed out by the US government.
Although the writ has yet to be made public, the Guardian understands that the claim will centre around losses from "interrupted business", normally used to cover businesses that can no longer trade because of flooding or loss of power supplies. AIG is expected to contest the claim.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2009/apr/04/madeleine-mcann-disappearance-holiday-resort
Not all of the writ was concerning Praia Da Luz but some was. So there was economic loss in the village thanks to Madeleine going missing.
Do you seeriously believe a bunch of 15 year olds cannot be organised and thorough?
I tend to judge a locale using a variety of factors one of which is graffiti defacement ... in 2014 I would have been singularly unimpressed to find walls and signage so marked leaving a permanent memory of Luz for the sake of a transient occurrence.
Very off putting.
However is this the thread for the discussion of the world economic situation as it affected Luz?
No but it is not about the posters that were defaced in Praia Da Luz either. Perhaps the thread is fluid and covering more topics than the OP statement covered. It seems to happen here regularly.
On the posters that were defaced, I cannot understand what the McCanns hoped to gain by putting them up, as anyone in the village would have known about Madeleine anyway and it would just make those people uncomfortable to see her face everywhere. All IMO.
In my opinion numbering amongst people who might have felt "uncomfortable" at publicising a missing child in the place she disappeared from are perpetrators or those who are covering for perpetrators.
In my opinion numbering amongst people who might have felt "uncomfortable" at publicising a missing child in the place she disappeared from are perpetrators or those who are covering for perpetrators.
Come on, Alice.
What reason would teenagers have to mutilate all the Madeleine posters IMO? Noteably not only Madeleines face BUT ALSO the PHONE NUMBER TO CONTACT with information
No, imo, it was organised by a cetain group, who for some reason wanted it to be forgotten that an abduction had happened.
I wonder why ?
I see you haven't share anything about all being well, in a financial sense in Praia Da Luz following Madeleine's disappearance.
How about this to show that all was NOT well.
The holiday company at the centre of the Madeleine McCann disappearance has launched a legal action against its insurers to recover lost earnings.
Mark Warner says holidaymakers stayed away from its Praia da Luz resort in Portugal because of the huge media coverage of the disappearance of Madeleine, then aged three, almost two years ago.
The firm filed the writ in the high court seeking compensation from AIG, the big US insurance company, which has had to be bailed out by the US government.
Although the writ has yet to be made public, the Guardian understands that the claim will centre around losses from "interrupted business", normally used to cover businesses that can no longer trade because of flooding or loss of power supplies. AIG is expected to contest the claim.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2009/apr/04/madeleine-mcann-disappearance-holiday-resort
Not all of the writ was concerning Praia Da Luz but some was. So there was economic loss in the village thanks to Madeleine going missing.
Well, of course. Those who bore the brunt of the unprecedented media storm, those who saw their village described as unsafe, those who lost their jobs must have been quite happy to see 'the circus' carrying on regardless.
"The Circus" concerned part of an investigation on behalf of a missing child.Nevertheless it did have all the elements of a Circus. &^^&*
Nevertheless it did have all the elements of a Circus. &^^&*Elephants?
Elephants?
I would imagine that any perpetrators would probably not feel uncomfortable on seeing billboards as they would believe that they are home free as Scotland Yard and the current PJ investigation haven't got anywhere IMO.
But Brietta what about the innocent local shop and pub keepers and their workers who's livelihoods rely on tourism in the village. Any thoughts for them and how they would feel?
Didn't see them ... but I saw one or two clowns being interviewed.
Clowns certainly featured in this case in my opinion. Take a certain Charlotte Pennington, for example. In September 2007 she told the Daily Mail;
“I was in the apartment less than five minutes after they found that Madeleine had gone.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-483715/Kate-McCann-DID-scream-Theyve-taken-claims-new-nanny-witness.html
She was contradicting her official statement to the PJ;
She did not enter the residence in question;
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/CHARLOTTE-PENNINGTON.htm
And her colleague's statement;
The witness immediately helped in the searches, whilst her colleague Charlotte remained at the crêche, looking after the other children that were there and waiting for the arrival of the last parents, after which she also began searching.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JACQUELINE_WILLIAMS.htm
“There were no children in the room. The twins had been taken out already, I think by one of the McCanns’ friends.
Miss Pennington explained that she spent the rest of the evening searching for Madeleine, before finally going to bed at 4am.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-483715/Kate-McCann-DID-scream-Theyve-taken-claims-new-nanny-witness.html
Interesting remark about the children, but it can't be taken seriously, can it?
You are taking a verbatim statement if here, and comparing it to the twice translated non verbatim statement in the files... The fact that they don't MST, h is evidence that the translated statements are not accurate
Clowns certainly featured in this case in my opinion. Take a certain Charlotte Pennington, for example. In September 2007 she told the Daily Mail;Have you considered the possibility (highly remote I know, given the Daily Mail’s reputation as an arbiter of factual reporting) that the article writer embellished certain parts of Pennington ‘s account, and it is they and not her who are the clowns in this example?
“I was in the apartment less than five minutes after they found that Madeleine had gone.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-483715/Kate-McCann-DID-scream-Theyve-taken-claims-new-nanny-witness.html
She was contradicting her official statement to the PJ;
She did not enter the residence in question;
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/CHARLOTTE-PENNINGTON.htm
And her colleague's statement;
The witness immediately helped in the searches, whilst her colleague Charlotte remained at the crêche, looking after the other children that were there and waiting for the arrival of the last parents, after which she also began searching.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JACQUELINE_WILLIAMS.htm
“There were no children in the room. The twins had been taken out already, I think by one of the McCanns’ friends.
Miss Pennington explained that she spent the rest of the evening searching for Madeleine, before finally going to bed at 4am.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-483715/Kate-McCann-DID-scream-Theyve-taken-claims-new-nanny-witness.html
Interesting remark about the children, but it can't be taken seriously, can it?
And you you said a few days ago that they were fairly accurate Davel. Which is it?It seems Davel is correct, with fairly being the operative word
"Although the writ has yet to be made public, the Guardian understands that the claim will centre around losses from "interrupted business", ]normally used to cover businesses that can no longer trade because of flooding or loss of power supplies. AIG is expected to contest the claim."
I remember looking into that at the time, but I don't remember what the result of that claim was, if any.
Since that happened, a little restaurant that I often popped into (not in Portugal) was vandalised. The owners were able to claim against insurance for repairs, which took ages, but not against the salaries that still had to be paid or loss of earnings.
I wondered later if that type of coverage was of a similar nature to what the OC was seeking, but I didn't check that out any further.
Have you considered the possibility (highly remote I know, given the Daily Mail’s reputation as an arbiter of factual reporting) that the article writer embellished certain parts of Pennington ‘s account, and it is they and not her who are the clowns in this example?
I don't believe it was teenagers who did that. IMO it was a message to foreigners to butt out of Portuguese affairs.
I'm happy to include the Daily Mail as one of the clowns, but not to exclude the nanny who has repeatedly appeared in the press with her version of events. I tend to accept direct quotes as provenance. If you want to believe Ms Pennington you will need to explain where the twins were five minutes after the alarm was raised.No I won't. I don't need to do anything. If you want to refer to has a clown, you'd better be sure that she made the whole thing up.
Or someone having the hump about flyposting and/or having a kin great hoarding erected on their land without permission.Have you a cite for the hoarding being illegally erected?
I'm happy to include the Daily Mail as one of the clowns, but not to exclude the nanny who has repeatedly appeared in the press with her version of events. I tend to accept direct quotes as provenance. If you want to believe Ms Pennington you will need to explain where the twins were five minutes after the alarm was raised.
No I won't. I don't need to do anything. If you want to refer to has a clown, you'd better be sure that she made the whole thing up.
If she was telling the truth others were lying through their teeth. Take your pick.
If she was telling the truth others were lying through their teeth. Take your pick.Like I said if you want to refer to her as a clown you better be sure she made the whole thing up. How sure are you?
With regard to Charlotte Pennington ‘s statement perhaps someone can explain why the two translations are at variance, with one saying she did not enter the Apartment, and the other not mentioning this detail?
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/CHARLOTTE-PENNINGTON.htm
Have you a cite for the hoarding being illegally erected?
With regard to Charlotte Pennington ‘s statement perhaps someone can explain why the two translations are at variance, with one saying she did not enter the Apartment, and the other not mentioning this detail?
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/CHARLOTTE-PENNINGTON.htm
These are amateurs translating. The information is present in the original Portuguese.
Did I say it was?You said the billboard was possibly defaced by someone annoyed at having a billboard illegally erected on their land. I see you were just mischievously speculating and have no basis whatsoever for this suggestion. I believe it is right to forgive one’s abusers and that is what I have chosen to do with you, although next time you abuse me on this forum I may have a change of heart. We will just have to wait and see, won’t we? 8(>((
You need to read my post in conjunction with Angelo's then you may have the full appreciation.
End of game.
Play ping pong on your own.
Whatever happened to "you are not talking to me again"?
Does this mean we are now friends again.
If I thought you weren't my friend, I just don't think I could bear it.
And there were amateurs translating the english statements into the portuguese you are reading....LOL
In my opinion Murat, as a native English speaker, was less likely to misunderstand what the witnesses were saying.
And you you said a few days ago that they were fairly accurate Davel. Which is it?
This was discussed some time ago...and as i recall...his english was good but his portuguese questionable.
you still dont understand...the translations of the portuguese files are fairly accurate....we can check them. we cannot check the statemnts of the tapas or pennington.. because we dont have the original statements
But we do Davel
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/CHARLOTTE-PENNINGTON.htm
No we don't... We have a non verbatim account of her statement written by Murat
If I sign something I'm ratifying it. It's then officially valid. All those statements were signed therefore they are valid pieces of evidence whether you like it or not.They are pieces of evidence... If you think they are, accurate you are misguided imo... It doesn't really bother me as it highlights the inadequacy of the PJ
They are pieces of evidence... If you think they are, accurate you are misguided imo... It doesn't really bother me as, bit highlights the inadequacy of the PJ
They are pieces of evidence... If you think they are, accurate you are misguided imo... It doesn't really bother me as it highlights the inadequacy of the PJWrong re the PJ.
If they are inaccurate the fault lies with those who signed them, no-one else. Illiterate people in the UK are in exactly the same position as the witnesses in Portugal were.
Wrong re the PJ.
A mobile phone was stolen from a family member a while back.
One of the steps involved was required to be discussed in Portuguese. The fact that the officers spoke English was irrelevant, it had to be conducted in Portuguese.
Hence a translator was required.
No... The fault lies with the PJ... The statements should have been recorded
Should statements taken in the UK be recorded too?
They are, in cases, where suspects do not speak english
No... The fault lies with the PJ... The statements should have been recordedUnless you can show a legal requirement, in Portugal, in 2007, to record such statements, you are simply misinforming the forum.
Unless you can show a legal requirement, in Portugal, in 2007, to record such statements, you are simply misinforming the forum.
Was there such a requirement?
Unless you can show a legal requirement, in Portugal, in 2007, to record such statements, you are simply misinforming the forum.
Was there such a requirement?
I'm misinforming no one.... The PJs method of recording statements for non Portuguese speakers is woefully inadequate..... .as Sutton pointed out and is a recipe for errorSo you have presented your opinion as fact, knowing there was no such requirement?
I'm misinforming no one.... The PJs method of recording statements for non Portuguese speakers is woefully inadequate..... .as Sutton pointed out and is a recipe for error
It is acceptable in Portugal, which is what matters. The opinions expressed by anyone else are irrelevant.
It is acceptable in Portugal, which is what matters. The opinions expressed by anyone else are irrelevant.
No we don't... We have a non verbatim account of her statement written by Murat
Davel you originally said we didn't have copies of the rogatory statements so couldn't be certain they were correct then you said this
you still dont understand...the translations of the portuguese files are fairly accurate....we can check them. we cannot check the statemnts of the tapas or pennington.. because we dont have the original statements
Charlotte Pennington's statement has an original DVD image for you to see. It is in the link I attached.
Now you are changing the goalposts which will therefore make ALL the statements possibly innaccurate in your book, and certainly when it suits you. All IMO.
What does the European Court say about it in 2007? If it says so ... I imagine that would cover Portugal's obligation.
Something like:
In various Member States not only the prosecution, but also judges and competent courts are charged with seeking both inculpatory and exculpatory evidence. Member States which do not have an adversarial system should be able to maintain their current system provided that it complies with this Directive and with other relevant provisions of Union and international law.
I would imagine.
so it doesnt address that particular problem.....The ECHR does guarantee the right to a fair trial so being coerced into signing something you dont understand may well be covered there
Have you read the entire directive?
It is acceptable in Portugal, which is what matters. The opinions expressed by anyone else are irrelevant.What is the current method of taking statements from foreigners? It is always difficult to find what historic legislation looked like.
What is the current method of taking statements from foreigners? It is always difficult to find what historic legislation looked like.
Looks like it must be in Portuguese
The submission of evidence is acceptable only in the Portuguese language. There is no right to have the
evidence translated into your language. You can, however, make an application to the court if you need
very important evidence to be translated. The decision is at the discretion of the court, but if the court
accepts, you will not have to pay for it.
https://pt.usembassy.gov/wp-content/uploads/sites/185/Judicial-Assistance-to-arrestees-handout_cleared-Nov2017.pdf
I cannot see the British police agreeing to have witness evidence in Portuguese either to be frank.
Looks like it must be in PortugueseWhat you have covered is the procedure in the court. In court evidence has to be submitted in Portuguese.
The submission of evidence is acceptable only in the Portuguese language. There is no right to have the
evidence translated into your language. You can, however, make an application to the court if you need
very important evidence to be translated. The decision is at the discretion of the court, but if the court
accepts, you will not have to pay for it.
https://pt.usembassy.gov/wp-content/uploads/sites/185/Judicial-Assistance-to-arrestees-handout_cleared-Nov2017.pdf
I cannot see the British police agreeing to have witness evidence in Portuguese either to be frank.
What you have covered is the procedure in the court. In court evidence has to be submitted in Portuguese.
What is in dispute is how a person who can't speak Portuguese going to give evidence? How is a non Portuguese witness going to give evidence?
How does the original statement get taken?
In many countries the original statement is taken in the native language of the witness, it is then translated to the language of the country where the Court is. The idea that there is no record of the original statement in the native language seems to be incorrect in my opinion. In the McCann case all the steps by the translators seems 100% verbal and only a Portuguese version results.
The fact that many months down the line the PJ were asking Kate ... "16 What does “we let her down” mean?" in my opinion shows the enormous chasm between what was said and the meaning of it.In veterinary terms we'd say "put her down" in other words euthanasia. Whereas a mother might "put her down" meaning put the baby girl to bed.
I believe the investigators thought it was a medical term ... one could have thought that if so it might have been pertinent to find out exactly what it did mean prior to the arguida interview.
In veterinary terms we'd say "put her down" in other words euthanasia. Whereas a mother might "put her down" meaning put the baby girl to bed.
There is certainly more than one possible meaning for a set of words.
Usually the meaning of a phrase is clear when used in context.True but if a vet came to me and said "I put my daughter down" I would be scratching my head.
True but if a vet came to me and said "I put my daughter down" I would be scratching my head.
So if Kate said we let her down, referring to Madeleine, what did she mean?
It is unlikely to be a confession as in "we let her down into a deep well where no one will ever find her".
More likely a cry of despair "we let her down by not being here".
True but if a vet came to me and said "I put my daughter down" I would be scratching my head.
So if Kate said we let her down, referring to Madeleine, what did she mean?
It is unlikely to be a confession as in "we let her down into a deep well where no one will ever find her".
More likely a cry of despair "we let her down by not being here".
The fact that many months down the line the PJ were asking Kate ... "16 What does “we let her down” mean?" in my opinion shows the enormous chasm between what was said and the meaning of it.
I believe the investigators thought it was a medical term ... one could have thought that if so it might have been pertinent to find out exactly what it did mean prior to the arguida interview.
It was something Kate thought at first, but she was later reassured (by a barrister no less!) that her behaviour was well within the bounds of reasonable parenting.
I'm misinforming no one.... The PJs method of recording statements for non Portuguese speakers is woefully inadequate..... .as Sutton pointed out and is a recipe for error
What is the current method of taking statements from foreigners? It is always difficult to find what historic legislation looked like.
The critical issue is how the statement may be used after it has been taken. It may only be in accordance with the relevant laws and court procedures. [Refer CCP].The statements taken from the majority Portuguese speaking witnesses were essentially OK IMO, it would only be those taken from non-Portuguese speaking persons that would have issues if it ever came to a court hearing.
The statements taken from the majority Portuguese speaking witnesses were essentially OK IMO, it would only be those taken from non-Portuguese speaking persons that would have issues if it ever came to a court hearing.
But you would think all statements should have been taken from the beginning to a standard that they could be used "in accordance with the relevant laws and court procedures".
They ended up with the crazy situation of one of the translators becoming an arguido.
Try looking at the English rules for witness statements, it is not so dissimilar.
Once you have grasped how the process works you will begin to understand how irrelevant some of this argument has become.
When you can produce a witness statement as evidence in court
To be admissible in court, evidence must be relevant to a fact which has to be proved, or disproved.
Nothing proves itself, and every fact, and document relied upon in court must be proved by admissible evidence.
When you cannot produce a witness statement as evidence
A written witness statement is not admissible on its own as evidence at trial if the defence do not agree with the evidence that has been written within it.
How the statement is used in court
The statement will be read out at the hearing, only if it has been agreed by both the
prosecution and defence. This allows for evidence to be given without having to call
the witness to attend. If there is no agreement, the statement will not be read out in court.
A witness may refer to specific documents in a statement and these documents or items of evidence will be ‘produced’ as exhibits in the case. Any document or object referred to as anexhibit and identified in the statement will be treated as if it has been produced by the person who made the statement.
For what happens in Portugal see CCP 78/87 Articles 128 onwards.
From the cps websiteI think Alice is saying it doesn't matter how the statements are taken as they are unlikely to have contributed to the case.
Any witness statement taken from a person who has difficulty in speaking or understanding English should be recorded in the foreign language and signed by the witness. It should include the declaration prescribed in section 9(2)(b) Criminal Justice Act 1967 or section 102(2
Things are quite different in the uk
https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/interpreters
From the cps website
Any witness statement taken from a person who has difficulty in speaking or understanding English should be recorded in the foreign language and signed by the witness. It should include the declaration prescribed in section 9(2)(b) Criminal Justice Act 1967 or section 102(2
Things are quite different in the uk
https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/interpreters
You are quoting how the statement is taken.
I was stating how it may used which is the only relevant criterion.
It matters not how it was taken given it complied with the procedures required by the specific country.
Are you suggesting The Home Office do not know waht they are on about in this context?
Definition of an ‘admissible witness statement’
To be admissible (allowed) in court section 9 of the Criminal Justice Act (CJA) 1967
states for a witness statement to be used as evidence in any criminal proceeding, other than committal proceedings, it must:
be a formal written document of a person
be a set of facts relating to a certain event, or events
be signed by the person who makes it, to confirm that the contents of the
document are true, this is known as a statement of truth
have had a copy served on the other parties before the trial
If all of the above apply, the witness does not always need to attend the trial to give oral evidence. But once they have made a written statement they may be called on to attend court and give their evidence in person. The jury do not see witness statements so the evidence contained in them will either be read out by counsel or be given oraly by the person who has given the statement
It sure screws things up for armchair tecs but in the real world the processes are not dissimilar in many countries.
The only armchair techs who it screws up are the sceptics who have used discrepancies in the, statements as evidence if guilt.... Thanks for pointing it out
The only armchair techs who it screws up are the sceptics who have used discrepancies in the, statements as evidence if guilt.... Thanks for pointing it out
Some supporters became quite fond of a certain archiving dispatch, but not all understood what it's actual significance was.
The only armchair techs who it screws up are the sceptics who have used discrepancies in the, statements as evidence if guilt.... Thanks for pointing it out
I think Alice is saying it doesn't matter how the statements are taken as they are unlikely to have contributed to the case.
I disagree, for if the witness was to give evidence in court the statement is often the source of the questions so it needs to be accurate.
I would say most if not all here did
You appear to have ducked the point.I found it a good point though. What we object to is the statements in Portuguese being signed off as being correct by non-Portuguese speaking witnesses. That is the unnatural point.
So most supporters became quite fond of a certain archiving dispatch, but not all understood what it's actual significance was.?
I found it a good point though. What we object to is the statements in Portuguese being signed off as being correct by non-Portuguese speaking witnesses. That is the unnatural point.
So most supporters became quite fond of a certain archiving dispatch, but not all understood what it's actual significance was.?
"but in the real world the processes are not dissimilar in many countries" what does that mean? Are the processes similar or different in many countries?
Google "dissimilar"
"dissimilar
adjective
not the same; different.
"a collection of dissimilar nations lacking overall homogeneity"
"but in the real world the processes are notdissimilar[not the same] in many countries"
Not not is a double negative becomes positive i.e. "not not the same" becomes "the same".
"but in the real world the processes are "the same" in many countries"
Alice is this what you meant? ".... but in the real world the processes are "the same" in many countries"
It is a standard English construction meaning: "more or less similar".OK I see it now "not dissimilar" is equivalent to "more or less similar". Thanks.
I would have normally just said "similar" but we might have ended up with half a dozen pages of pedantry so I elected to use "not dissimilar" to avoid that. Pious hopes on my part, on that score it would seem.
Do you have a cite not all understood... From the posts I've seen everyone understood it perfectly
It was what you said?
Put it this way I am trying to understand it and apply the rule that arguments should not be "ad hominem".
"ad hominem
adverb & adjective
1.
(of an argument or reaction) directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining.
"an ad hominem response"
2.
relating to or associated with a particular person.
"the office was created ad hominem for Fenton""
The question "Perhaps you don't understand what it says?" is questioning a person's understanding and their potential to understand.
IMO it is definitely "directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining".
Absolutely Rob. Criticism of other member's opinions and calling into question their understanding of the case is something which should be avoided. Every member has the equal right to air their genuinely held opinion or belief. If challenges are made then those challenges should address the facts and not the member's ability.
Constantly claiming that other posters are wrong without providing any facts to support such an assertion is tiresome.
I haven't been here long, but Christopher Biggins, there's an inordinate amount of squabbling over semantics and minutiae. All this circular, irrelevant back biting is utterly futile and is counter productive.
...and no I can't provide a cite for that.
I haven't been here long, but Christopher Biggins, there's an inordinate amount of squabbling over semantics and minutiae. All this circular, irrelevant back biting is utterly futile and is counter productive.
...and no I can't provide a cite for that.
Put it this way I am trying to understand it and apply the rule that arguments should not be "ad hominem".
"ad hominem
adverb & adjective
1.
(of an argument or reaction) directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining.
"an ad hominem response"
2.
relating to or associated with a particular person.
"the office was created ad hominem for Fenton""
The question "Perhaps you don't understand what it says?" is questioning a person's understanding and their potential to understand.
IMO it is definitely "directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining".
I think this debate is in response to a post made by SIL (now deleted) but I thought I'd let SIL know why I deleted the post IMO it was an "ad hom" argument.
(of an argument or reaction) directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining.
"an ad hominem response"
When I say IMO sceptics don't understand the evidence then that is directed at the position they hold... Not the person... And is therefore not ad hom
If it's my opinion.... Am I not allowed to express my opinion... Im happy to justfy my opinion.
I think this debate is in response to a post made by SIL (now deleted) but I thought I'd let SIL why I deleted the post IMO it was an "ad hom" argument.
You are right. It was. I agreed with you.I still allow criticism of the subject. You could say "I think your understanding of the issue is incorrect", but not "I think you are incapable of understanding the issue".
I think this debate is in response to a post made by SIL (now deleted) but I thought I'd let SIL know why I deleted the post IMO it was an "ad hom" argument.
I still allow criticism of the subject. You could say "I think your understanding of the issue is incorrect", but not "I think you are incapable of understanding the issue".
Put it this way I am trying to understand it and apply the rule that arguments should not be "ad hominem".
"ad hominem
adverb & adjective
1.
(of an argument or reaction) directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining.
"an ad hominem response"
2.
relating to or associated with a particular person.
"the office was created ad hominem for Fenton""
The question "Perhaps you don't understand what it says?" is questioning a person's understanding and their potential to understand.
IMO it is definitely "directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining".