Latest news on the search for Madeleine McCann

[pegasus]

"...uma conversa contada em segunda mão e supostamente ouvida perto da casa ...... sobre um corpo que era preciso fazer desapararer ..."
Source: Jornal De Noticias 03 July 2014



This supposed "overheard conversation", highly interesting if true,  is news to me.
Does anyone have any further sources for the overhearing of this conversation please?
Anyone know the exact location? Or what time/date it was? Or what language it was in?

[Carana]

"...uma conversa contada em segunda mão e supostamente ouvida perto da casa ...... sobre um corpo que era preciso fazer desapararer ..."
Source: Jornal De Noticias 03 July 2014
http://www.mccannfiles.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/JN2July2014page11b.jpg

This supposed "overheard conversation", highly interesting if true,  is news to me.
Does anyone have any further sources for the overhearing of this conversation please?
Anyone know the exact location? Or what time/date it was? Or what language it was in?

Where is that on the page, Pegasus? I find the tiny type hard to read. Could you point out which column, please?

[Brietta]

"...uma conversa contada em segunda mão e supostamente ouvida perto da casa ...... sobre um corpo que era preciso fazer desapararer ..."
Source: Jornal De Noticias 03 July 2014
http://www.mccannfiles.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/JN2July2014page11b.jpg

This supposed "overheard conversation", highly interesting if true,  is news to me.
Does anyone have any further sources for the overhearing of this conversation please?
Anyone know the exact location? Or what time/date it was? Or what language it was in?

I can only find one other reference
http://unterdenteppichgekehrt.blogspot.co.uk/

[Mr Gray]

Is it a fact that Amaral is claiming that what he is saying is a fact ?

Yes...are you not aware of that

[jassi]

Yes...are you not aware of that

I am always doubtful of anything of which you are the source.

[gilet]

In a bank robbery, workers at the bank would be investigated, in case it was an inside job.

Din't you know that ?

Yes but unlike you the police would not remain fixated on the bank workers once it was evident that there was no evidence of any crime having been committed by them.

That is the major flaw in your position.

Unlike you real police then look at all other possibilities. Indeed the real police don't just look at the workers in the first instance. They look widely at all possibilities from the outset.

But they never just give up and repeat mantra-like that nobody else is to blame but the workers who were not able to prevent the disappearance of the money because they hadn't got the right protective glass or some of them were on a tea-break.

[pegasus]

Where is that on the page, Pegasus? I find the tiny type hard to read. Could you point out which column, please?

A suspicious conversation being overheard: the bottom part of page, left column.
http://www.mccannfiles.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/JN2July2014page11b.jpg

[pegasus]

I can only find one other reference
http://unterdenteppichgekehrt.blogspot.co.uk/

Thanks. Yes as that site points out, the information about overhearing the suspicious conversation came to the PJ "second-hand" which presumably means not directly from the actual witness. My guess is it could have been information given to the PJ anonymously? I think it is likely to be nothing to do with SM, but I find it very interesting.

[Carana]

A suspicious conversation being overheard: the bottom part of page, left column.
http://www.mccannfiles.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/JN2July2014page11b.jpg

Thanks. It's with the mysterious sofa. I think I'll wait for something more official than vague rumours.

[Air Con]

Yes but unlike you the police would not remain fixated on the bank workers once it was evident that there was no evidence of any crime having been committed by them.

With no proof of anyone else being involved what else are they expected to do?

[Alfred R Jones]

With no proof of anyone else being involved what else are they expected to do?

Keep investigating with an open mind maybe?

[Air Con]

Keep investigating with an open mind maybe?

You have one line of enquiry with obvious involvement and no other line of enquiry with any involvement.

Which route would you go down as a priority?

[Alfred R Jones]

You have one line of enquiry with obvious involvement and no other line of enquiry with any involvement.

Which route would you go down as a priority?

Once it became apparent that there was no evidence of involvement by the bank workers, you would obviously shift your attention to other lines of enquiry, wouldn't you?  Or would you stubbornly refuse to consider any alternative lines of enquiry and just keep hammering away at the bank workers in the hope that one of them might crack one day?

[slartibartfast]

Yes but unlike you the police would not remain fixated on the bank workers once it was evident that there was no evidence of any crime having been committed by them.

That is the major flaw in your position.

Unlike you real police then look at all other possibilities. Indeed the real police don't just look at the workers in the first instance. They look widely at all possibilities from the outset.

But they never just give up and repeat mantra-like that nobody else is to blame but the workers who were not able to prevent the disappearance of the money because they hadn't got the right protective glass or some of them were on a tea-break.

However, if the bank workers statements were contradictory, they claimed a robbery had happened without further corroborating evidence, a sniffer dog had alerted to the scent of bank money bags at their houses, etc. The police might be less inclined to look elsewhere.

[sadie]

However, if the back workers statements were contradictory, they claimed a robbery had happened without further corroborating evidence, a sniffer dog had alerted to the scent of bank money bags at their houses, etc. The police might be less inclined to look elsewhere.

But in this case

-  The statements were not contradictory beyond what was a normal variance.

-  There was evidence that there was an abduction.  PLs doint keep saying that there was none.

-  No sniffer dog alerted to anything that proved anything.  This has been well analysed in here and this you should know by now.



-  There was nothing, at all, to indicate anything against The Mccanns, let alone prove it


Only the word of a policeman who tells downright lies .... a criminal, who was convicted of Perjury. 
He based his thesis on nothing,  Nothing at all.