What i mean is that its important because of what she done and could of caused damage. But essentially by fruiess i dont think theor was a need for police to take a statement. But it seems her statement is or was important in for amti groups to use it against them, thats what i mean by fruitless.
Under normal circumstances we would probably never have heard of Yvonne Martin or the many individuals who give
confidential statements in a police inquiry.
I think the majority would be appalled.
I rather think that Yvonne Martin may very well number amongst them.
As far as I know she has never once sought to "cash in" on her 'notoriety' in any way whatsoever.
I think there is an important side issue here regarding public confidence. It is one thing making a statement which might later be tested when presented in a court of law. It is a different matter if your confidentiality is breached by your police statement appearing in the public domain without your consent.
Please - NOBODY come back at me protesting it is part of the Portuguese process when it patently is not. This is unique and I know it is until somebody shows me internet case files in other Portuguese cases.
I think you hit the nail on the head when you point out the use made of the McCann files. Sheer nasty propaganda - and as such I think publication must be a sheer embarrassment to someone working in a caring profession.
