Sceptics beliefs ?

[Mr Gray]

You take it right. Convince me. In the appropriate thread, obviously. Let's take this out in to the car park.

When the ONLY evidence in any case is confessions... With NO supporting evidence... I think there is reason to question the conviction

[The General]

Joana went missing and no trace of her was found ... the case was 'solved' in much the same manner as the PJ hoped to 'solve' Madeleine's case.
It seems that sceptics don't like the idea that unlike Joana's ... Madeleine's case is still being worked.

By the way ~ having reviewed the evidence in Joana's case ... what is your opinion of the forensics, particularly the blood evidence?

If I may I will read a little more and respond later.

[Mr Gray]

If I may I will read a little more and respond later.

Amaral worked how they did it.... Including the fridge... It didn't seem to matter there wasn't one piece if evidence to support his theory

[Brietta]

If I may I will read a little more and respond later.

I'm interested in the forensic reports.  So in your own time.

[Brietta]

Amaral worked how they did it.... Including the fridge... It didn't seem to matter there wasn't one piece if evidence to support his theory

Or that the fridge was never going to be big enough for Joana's body even if dismembered as gruesomely demonstrated.

[Lace]

Or that the fridge was never going to be big enough for Joana's body even if dismembered as gruesomely demonstrated.

Yes, I found that very strange that the body parts wouldn't have fitted in the freezer,  yet nothing was said about that.

[G-Unit]

Yes, but do you now accept that the McCanns wrote to the PJ and their please were ignored, like I said many dozens of posts ago and about which you have been nit-picking ever since?

Your words are incorrect.

[G-Unit]

It would appear to be a constant sceptic belief that Kate McCann was not entitled to refuse to answer questions when she was made an arguida in accordance with Portuguese law.

She was perfectly entitled to refuse to answer questions. Trying to suggest three months later that she had always 'worked with' the police obviously wasn't correct.

[ShiningInLuz]

Snip
Today Carlos had advised me not to answer any of the questions put to me. He explained that this was my right as an arguida and it was the safest option: any responses I gave might unintentionally implicate me in some way.
He knew the system better than I ever would, so it struck me as prudent to accept his guidance.
Since I was unable to comprehend how anything I’d said already could have led me to this point, I wasn’t about to try to get through to the police again now.    Kate McCann

She acted on legal advice and having spent many hours being interrogated on the previous day knew that the police just weren't listening to what she had to say or they would not have made her arguida.

I think she was well aware of the ramifications.  She would know that Joana Cipriano's mother was in jail and that no-one was looking for Joana who was the last missing child case Amaral had worked.

Oh dear, where to start?

She wasn't 'interrogated', she was questioned as a witness.  Regarding events that would not incriminate her.

As to why she was made an arguida the next day.  When one is asked questions that might lead to incrimination,  Portugal requires that one is made an arguido, as it confers rights and freedoms not open to a witness.  Notice the word 'might'.  7 arguidos on, and not one has been charged with anything.

If you have any information that Kate was aware of the Cipriano case, this would be a good time to reveal it.  I do not recall Kate making such a claim.  If you don't it is pure speculation.

[Wonderfulspam]

Amaral worked how they did it.... Including the fridge... It didn't seem to matter there wasn't one piece if evidence to support his theory

There is plenty of evidence Joana is dead.

[Mr Gray]

There is plenty of evidence Joana is dead.

there is no evidence to support amarals theory

[Wonderfulspam]

there is no evidence to support amarals theory

Of course there is?!

[barrier]

there is no evidence to support amarals theory

Supposedly Grange had evidence of some burglary gone wrong, dug up the countryside to prove themselves wrong,go figure.

[Brietta]

She was perfectly entitled to refuse to answer questions. Trying to suggest three months later that she had always 'worked with' the police obviously wasn't correct.

Of course she was ... that being the case one has to wonder why sceptics feel the need to make such a song and dance about it.

What were they doing at the weekly meetings held with the PJ then if not discussing Madeleine ... giving the translators some practice?

[Mr Gray]

Supposedly Grange had evidence of some burglary gone wrong, dug up the countryside to prove themselves wrong,go figure.

They may well.. But the evidence amaral thought implicated the McCann's didn't exist