So what actual searching was there?

[pathfinder73]

According to the Archiving Report the alarm was raised around 10pm, some people choose to interpret around 10pm to be anything from 9.30pm to 10.15pm in order to make their theories work, however in my book around 10pm means 9.55 - 10.05pm - how do you choose to interpret it?

You find out who actually knew the time first not what anyone was told. Witnesses who looked at their watch or a clock. Without is guesswork.

Timeline is crucial in Lafon murder investigation
North Las Vegas police say they are re-evaluating the timeline in the Andrea Lafon murder case. New details were revealed at a news conference that raise questions about what happened that night and who was involved.

[Alice Purjorick]

So - collusion to cover up a crime is not a criminal offence in Portugal then?

Did I say it wasn't?
You haven't been following all the posts by ferryman and Carana about how, when, why, and where the judiciary would impose arguido(a) status on someone. Only if they think they have enough evidence to bring a charge if they wish to.

[Alfred R Jones]

Did I say it wasn't?
You haven't been following all the posts by ferryman and Carana about how, when, why, and where the judiciary would impose arguido(a) status on someone. Only if they think they have enough evidence to bring a charge if they wish to.

So why did you ask "why would they be made arguido(a) then, in response to the following if you concede that collusion up cover up a crime is an offence in Portugal?

As none of the McCanns' friends was ever made an arguido, I think it's safe to assume that potential collusion had been ruled out by the investigating officers, and that corroborative testimony was taken from the restaurant staff which tallied more or less with their statements regarding the events at dinner that evening

Which bit of the above do you actually disagree with, if anything?

[Alfred R Jones]

Question - who from the Tapas group apart from the McCanns did a check on the McCann children that night and why were they not made arguido?  Did they not have an opportunity to 'do away' with the child also?  What evidence was there that ruled them out of such a scenario?

[ferryman]

You seem to forget that they have the correct timeline now which is much different. Kate left at 9:51 not 10pm.

Forget?

Never knew.

But then my memory is failing.

Who are they, exactly?

[Alfred R Jones]

You seem to forget that they have the correct timeline now which is much different. Kate left at 9:51 not 10pm.

Can you provide an authoritative cite to confirm this definitive statement please.

[Alice Purjorick]

According to the Archiving Report the alarm was raised around 10pm, some people choose to interpret around 10pm to be anything from 9.30pm to 10.15pm in order to make their theories work, however in my book around 10pm means 9.55 - 10.05pm - how do you choose to interpret it?

Sorry mods wandering off topic here! bin it if you like!

The report says around 22:00?.
I wouldn't try to second guess the accuracy they implied with "around" until I had read what they had read by way of testimony.
The statements of those involved seem to give a "start time" as early as 21:45 and "finish time" as late as 22:00 for the alarm being raised. Of course you can play interpolating games if you wish with times in other statements and how long does it take to have a pee or eat a piece of steak to shave a few seconds off here or add a minute on there if you wish.
I am happy with 21:45 to 22:00.
Then we have the Smith's statement to fix a time on. Mr Smith seems to think they left Kelly's bar 21:50 to 22:00
So a potential sighting time can reasonably assessed and it's span.
Then do a little plan based on Earliest Start/Earliest Finish. Latest Start/Latest Finish. Earliest Start/Latest Finish for both events and see what pans out.

[Alfred R Jones]

Sorry mods wandering off topic here! bin it if you like!

The report says around 22:00?.
I wouldn't try to second guess the accuracy they implied with "around" until I had read what they had read by way of testimony.
The statements of those involved seem to give a "start time" as early as 21:45 and "finish time" as late as 22:00 for the alarm being raised. Of course you can play interpolating games if you wish with times in other statements and how long does it take to have a pee or eat a piece of steak to shave a few seconds off here or add a minute on there if you wish.
I am happy with 21:45 to 22:00.
Then we have the Smith's statement to fix a time on. Mr Smith seems to think they left Kelly's bar 21:50 to 22:00
So a potential sighting time can reasonably assessed and it's span.
Then do a little plan based on Earliest Start/Earliest Finish. Latest Start/Latest Finish. Earliest Start/Latest Finish for both events and see what pans out.

Actually, Gerry gives the time of the alarm being raised at 10.13 - ask Faithlilly -  so if you're going to accept the possibility that any one of those time estimates is correct, then you should really include his timing too, shouldn't you?   So now "around 10pm" gives you a 30 minute time span thus allowing for all manner of skulduggery to take place in whatever manner it suits you to imagine it.

[pathfinder73]

Forget?

Never knew.

But then my memory is failing.

Who are they, exactly?

There were many reports about suspect phone calls and the times.

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/386992/Madeleine-McCann-suspects-kept-regular-phone-contact

[Alfred R Jones]

There were many reports about suspect phone calls and the times.

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/386992/Madeleine-McCann-suspects-kept-regular-phone-contact

So,the Daily Star is now an authoritative source for nailing the timeline is it?

[faithlilly]

So,the Daily Star is now an authoritative source for nailing the timeline is it?

Shouldn't that be my line ?

[Alfred R Jones]

Shouldn't that be my line ?

Well you weren't going to say it to one of your own team were you?

[Alice Purjorick]

Actually, Gerry gives the time of the alarm being raised at 10.13 - ask Faithlilly -  so if you're going to accept the possibility that any one of those time estimates is correct, then you should really include his timing too, shouldn't you?   So now "around 10pm" gives you a 30 minute time span thus allowing for all manner of skulduggery to take place in whatever manner it suits you to imagine it.

I am not imagining any skulduggery. I am trying to fix timing within limits as demonstrated by witness statements. Then by established practices calculate maximum and minimum time spans. Then account for where all the protagonists were in those time spans as stated by themselves and others.  Having done that sit down and analyse to see what drops out.

[Alfred R Jones]

I am not imagining any skulduggery. I am trying to fix timing within limits as demonstrated by witness statements. Then by established practices calculate maximum and minimum time spans. Then account for where all the protagonists were in those time spans as stated by themselves and others.  Having done that sit down and analyse to see what drops out.

Ooh, get you!  Do let us know what drops out after you've had a sit down, hope it's not too painful though!

[faithlilly]

Well you weren't going to say it to one of your own team were you?

I think I just have !