UK Justice Forum 🇬🇧

Disappeared and Abducted Children and Young Adults => Madeleine McCann (3) disappeared from her parent's holiday apartment at Ocean Club, Praia da Luz, Portugal on 3 May 2007. No trace of her has ever been found. => Topic started by: faithlilly on March 20, 2017, 02:23:57 PM

Title: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: faithlilly on March 20, 2017, 02:23:57 PM
Did anyone see the Storyville episode last week Murder In Italy? Very interesting. The prosecutor on that case stated that the only individuals who don't answer when questioned are guilty ones. Makes you think, doesn't it?

531
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alfie on March 20, 2017, 02:29:27 PM
Did anyone see the Storyville episode last week Murder In Italy? Very interesting. The prosecutor on that case stated that the only individuals who don't answer when questioned are guilty ones. Makes you think, doesn't it?
Really?  How interesting.  Makes you wonder why they even bother taking cases to trial then doesn't it?  Ask the suspect a question and if he refuses to answer it means he must be guilty, so bang him up and throw away the key.  Perfect!
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Benice on March 20, 2017, 02:54:17 PM
Really?  How interesting.  Makes you wonder why they even bother taking cases to trial then doesn't it?  Ask the suspect a question and if he refuses to answer it means he must be guilty, so bang him up and throw away the key.  Perfect!

Apparently - even if you know you are innocent and you know an attempt to pin a crime on you which you didn't commit is in progress  - you should do your best to help the police to frame you.

Crazy logic.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alfie on March 20, 2017, 03:02:39 PM
Apparently - even if you know you are innocent and you know an attempt to pin a crime on you which you didn't commit is in progress  - you should do your best to help the police to frame you.

Crazy logic.
The sensible thing to do in such a situation is to give the cops no ammunition whatsoever, even if it means 10 years down the line some idiot on the internet thinks your refusal to answer the questions proves your guilt.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on March 20, 2017, 03:10:43 PM
Apparently - even if you know you are innocent and you know an attempt to pin a crime on you which you didn't commit is in progress  - you should do your best to help the police to frame you.

Crazy logic.
You appear to be more than one assumption here.

If Kate was innocent then taking the opportunity to correct any points in error put by the police would have been to the benefit of both Kate and Madeleine.

Unless Kate confessed to a crime, the police were in no position whatsoever to use her responses to 'frame' her.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alfie on March 20, 2017, 03:17:03 PM
You appear to be more than one assumption here.

If Kate was innocent then taking the opportunity to correct any points in error put by the police would have been to the benefit of both Kate and Madeleine.

Unless Kate confessed to a crime, the police were in no position whatsoever to use her responses to 'frame' her.
Perhaps you should have been Kate's attorney then, instead of the idiot who advised her.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on March 20, 2017, 06:23:26 PM
Perhaps you should have been Kate's attorney then, instead of the idiot who advised her.
Given that I'm not a lawyer in Portugal, that one is a non-starter.

As to whether the person who allegedly advised her to keep quiet is an idiot, that is a separate matter.

Kate is allegedly intelligent, therefore she should be able to decide what was/is in Madeleine's best interests.  I'm just not seeing it.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on March 20, 2017, 06:30:48 PM
Given that I'm not a lawyer in Portugal, that one is a non-starter.

As to whether the person who allegedly advised her to keep quiet is an idiot, that is a separate matter.

Kate is allegedly intelligent, therefore she should be able to decide what was/is in Madeleine's best interests.  I'm just not seeing it.

it was not in maddies interest to answer those questions....Kate did absolutely the right thing
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on March 20, 2017, 06:37:14 PM
it was not in maddies interest to answer those questions....Kate did absolutely the right thing
ROFL

It was not in Madeleine's interest for information to be provided or misconceptions to be corrected?

Absolute tripe.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: stephen25000 on March 20, 2017, 06:40:22 PM
it was not in maddies interest to answer those questions....Kate did absolutely the right thing

It was nothing to do with Madeleine's interests.

It was done in case she contradicted her husband.

Get real.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on March 20, 2017, 07:05:41 PM
ROFL

It was not in Madeleine's interest for information to be provided or misconceptions to be corrected?

Absolute tripe.

the 48 questions were of no use to the investigation.......the PJ were talking tripe when they said the dogs alerted to a cadaver....total tripe


we know as  fact from amaral and others taht the pj were convinced the parents were covering up an accident.......the pj had no evidence against kate and were just fishing...

Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: stephen25000 on March 20, 2017, 07:23:19 PM
the 48 questions were of no use to the investigation.......the PJ were talking tripe when they said the dogs alerted to a cadaver....total tripe


we know as  fact from amaral and others taht the pj were convinced the parents were covering up an accident.......the pj had no evidence against kate and were just fishing...


You don't know if the dogs didn't alert to a body.

The PJ found no evidence of an abduction.

Kate Mccann didn't answer the questions , in  case they contradicted her husbands answers.

...and we know what her final comment was on this. 8(0(*
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: stephen25000 on March 20, 2017, 07:27:12 PM
Q.  Are you aware that in not answering the questions you are jeopardising the investigation, which seeks to discover what happened to your daughter?


A.  'Yes, if that’s what the investigation thinks.'


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1041635/The-48-questions-Kate-McCann-wouldnt-answer--did.html#ixzz4btbyU46H
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Benice on March 21, 2017, 08:50:59 AM
Given that I'm not a lawyer in Portugal, that one is a non-starter.

As to whether the person who allegedly advised her to keep quiet is an idiot, that is a separate matter.

Kate is allegedly intelligent, therefore she should be able to decide what was/is in Madeleine's best interests.  I'm just not seeing it.

Kate did decide.    She knew that if an innocent person was in prison then the guilty party would still be at large and no-one would be searching for her daughter.     Therefore on the advice of her lawyer she took the route that minimised the possibility of the wrong  person (herself) being charged  - and protected Madeleine's right to continue to be searched for as a living, missing person and not dismissed as a dead one.

You only have to read the 48 questions to know that finding a reason to pin the crime on Kate was the PJ's objective.

Kate's 'crime' appears by some to be that she took the excellent advice of her  lawyer.     Bizarre.

IMO

Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on March 21, 2017, 09:24:46 AM
Kate did decide.    She knew that if an innocent person was in prison then the guilty party would still be at large and no-one would be searching for her daughter.     Therefore on the advice of her lawyer she took the route that minimised the possibility of the wrong  person (herself) being charged  - and protected Madeleine's right to continue to be searched for as a living, missing person and not dismissed as a dead one.

You only have to read the 48 questions to know that finding a reason to pin the crime on Kate was the PJ's objective.

Kate's 'crime' appears by some to be that she took the excellent advice of her  lawyer.     Bizarre.

IMO
This has, AFAIK, several assumptions built in.

Is there a source other than Kate saying she was advised not to answer?

Was she advised question by question?  Given that she refused to answer some questions but chose to answer others.  Who advised/decided which were OK to answer?

It matters not a jot what you think the PJs motive was.  Kate had the opportunity to refute any case the PJ made and chose not to do so.  Kate had the opportunity to advance the search for Madeleine by clarifying what happened, and she chose not to do so.

It was Madeleine who got a rough deal out of this approach.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Robittybob1 on March 21, 2017, 09:32:59 AM
This has, AFAIK, several assumptions built in.

Is there a source other than Kate saying she was advised not to answer?

Was she advised question by question?  Given that she refused to answer some questions but chose to answer others.  Who advised/decided which were OK to answer?

It matters not a jot what you think the PJs motive was.  Kate had the opportunity to refute any case the PJ made and chose not to do so.  Kate had the opportunity to advance the search for Madeleine by clarifying what happened, and she chose not to do so.

It was Madeleine who got a rough deal out of this approach.
Not many posts upset me but anyone believing answering these questions was designed to assist the search for Madeleine is alien to me.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alfie on March 21, 2017, 09:39:49 AM
This has, AFAIK, several assumptions built in.

Is there a source other than Kate saying she was advised not to answer?

Was she advised question by question?  Given that she refused to answer some questions but chose to answer others.  Who advised/decided which were OK to answer?

It matters not a jot what you think the PJs motive was.  Kate had the opportunity to refute any case the PJ made and chose not to do so.  Kate had the opportunity to advance the search for Madeleine by clarifying what happened, and she chose not to do so.

It was Madeleine who got a rough deal out of this approach.
What areas of what happened had Kate not already clarified to the PJ before, do you think?  Gerry answered all the questions put to him - how did that help the PJ to find out what happened to Madeleine?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on March 21, 2017, 10:03:56 AM
Not many posts upset me but anyone believing answering these questions was designed to assist the search for Madeleine is alien to me.
Why does one care if one assesses the questions as 'designed to assist' or not?  The opportunity existed for Kate to influence PJ thinking.  She did not take it.  Or rather, her influence was negative.

I had a rather curious incident about a month ago.  I was 'accused' by a neighbour of ringing his door bell and then departing.  Quite clearly, my neighbour believed I had done this.  I took the opportunity to assert that I had not touched his door bell (which was true) and he was forced to accept this.  What he thinks internally - who knows.

Kate's situation was the same, though obviously more important.  If she had done a Gerry and answered all the questions, then it may have influenced the investigation in a positive manner.  As she didn't answer most of the questions, we will never know.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: The Singularity on March 21, 2017, 10:07:22 AM

Kate's situation was the same, though obviously more important.  If she had done a Gerry and answered all the questions, then it may have influenced the investigation in a positive manner.  As she didn't answer most of the questions, we will never know.

It's not really, if your neighbor still didn't believe you they wouldn't be able to detain you or keep hauling you into the house asking the same questions in different ways. Plus a life wasn't at stake it's just a door bell
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Benice on March 21, 2017, 10:10:32 AM
This has, AFAIK, several assumptions built in.

Is there a source other than Kate saying she was advised not to answer?

Was she advised question by question?  Given that she refused to answer some questions but chose to answer others.  Who advised/decided which were OK to answer?

It matters not a jot what you think the PJs motive was.  Kate had the opportunity to refute any case the PJ made and chose not to do so.  Kate had the opportunity to advance the search for Madeleine by clarifying what happened, and she chose not to do so.

It was Madeleine who got a rough deal out of this approach.

I'm afraid my faith in the PJ to accept any answers that didn't suit their agenda is zero.

We are dealing with police officers who actually consider that wearing a black top is a sign of guilt and who changed the whole direction of a case on the strength of a dream.   It would appear from some of the questions that 'gossip' is also considered to be important.

If that is what constitutes evidence to the PJ then it hardly inspires confidence in Kate getting a fair hearing IMO.

Their objective was to find a reason to pin the crime on Kate.   Anyone who thinks she should have helped them to do that needs a reality check IMO.

Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on March 21, 2017, 10:13:55 AM
What areas of what happened had Kate not already clarified to the PJ before, do you think?  Gerry answered all the questions put to him - how did that help the PJ to find out what happened to Madeleine?
Are you being serious?

Given that Kate is on record as one short interview on 4 May plus half an interview the day before being made an arguido, given that Kate made the discovery, the answer to your first question is blindingly obvious.

Gerry's influence on the PJ thinking is not on file.  We could play the speculation game on that point all day long and not make progress.  However, Kate is the one alleged to have discovered Madeleine's disappearance, so her evidence was critical.

It was an opportunity to progress the search for the truth about Madeleine.  Madeleine's mother balked at this opportunity.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alfie on March 21, 2017, 10:21:41 AM
Are you being serious?

Given that Kate is on record as one short interview on 4 May plus half an interview the day before being made an arguido, given that Kate made the discovery, the answer to your first question is blindingly obvious.

Gerry's influence on the PJ thinking is not on file.  We could play the speculation game on that point all day long and not make progress.  However, Kate is the one alleged to have discovered Madeleine's disappearance, so her evidence was critical.

It was an opportunity to progress the search for the truth about Madeleine.  Madeleine's mother balked at this opportunity.
Yes I am serious.  The only way Kate could have provided information to assist the police in finding Madeleine that she had not already given them is if she actually had some knowledge about where Madeleine had gone.  Do you think she possesses such information?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alfie on March 21, 2017, 10:23:56 AM
For example - Madeleine's sleeping habits at home or relationship with her mother - what relevance would this be in the case of stranger abduction?  They are only relevant if Kate is somehow involved.  Assuming Kate is not involved why should she answer such questions, and how does answering them help find an abductor?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alfie on March 21, 2017, 10:25:51 AM
Assuming Kate did not have a hand in her child's disappearance but imagine for a moment she answered - "yes Madeleine was a difficult child and had sleep problems" - there we have the beginnings of a glimmer of a motive.  Leading questions designed to self-incriminate.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: faithlilly on March 21, 2017, 10:27:50 AM
Assuming Kate did not have a hand in her child's disappearance but imagine for a moment she answered - "yes Madeleine was a difficult child and had sleep problems" - there we have the beginnings of a glimmer of a motive.  Leading questions designed to self-incriminate.

Gerry answered all the questions put to him and I believe he is still a free man.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on March 21, 2017, 10:28:56 AM
It's not really, if your neighbor still didn't believe you they wouldn't be able to detain you or keep hauling you into the house asking the same questions in different ways. Plus a life wasn't at stake it's just a door bell
Unfortunately, your post is high on emotion and low on fact.

First, prior to being made arguidos, the McCanns had published that they were returning to England.  If they had done this move a bit faster, it is probable that they would not have been made arguidos.

Second, having been made arguidos, they were not restricted in their movement.  Specifically, they were free to return to England, and that is what they rapidly did.

Third, a life was at stake.  Madeleine's, not Kate's.

If you wish to defend a mother who spurned the opportunity to advance the search for Madeleine, go for it.  This tells me that you are raising Kate's circumstances above those of Madeleine.  And that is an arrangement I firmly reject.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alfie on March 21, 2017, 10:38:47 AM
Gerry answered all the questions put to him and I believe he is still a free man.
Indeed he is, well spotted.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on March 21, 2017, 10:39:19 AM
I'm afraid my faith in the PJ to accept any answers that didn't suit their agenda is zero.

We are dealing with police officers who actually consider that wearing a black top is a sign of guilt and who changed the whole direction of a case on the strength of a dream.   It would appear from some of the questions that 'gossip' is also considered to be important.

If that is what constitutes evidence to the PJ then it hardly inspires confidence in Kate getting a fair hearing IMO.

Their objective was to find a reason to pin the crime on Kate.   Anyone who thinks she should have helped them to do that needs a reality check IMO.
Another post high on emotion and low on fact.  Where to begin?

Your opinion of what the PJ would and would not 'accept' is irrelevant, as is mine.  As is Kate's.  As is her lawyer's.

She was with her lawyer, so any process had to be legal, unless you think her lawyer was not up to the mark.

It matters not a jot what the aim of the PJ was.  It was an opportunity to progress the truth about Madeleine.  An opportunity which Kate spurned.

Kate put Kate above Madeleine.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: faithlilly on March 21, 2017, 10:45:35 AM
Indeed he is, well spotted.

Then it would have been different for Kate because.......?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alfie on March 21, 2017, 10:50:06 AM
Then it would have been different for Kate because.......?
I didn't say it would be different.  Gerry chose to answer the questions, his prerogative.  Clearly he didn't give the PJ any ammunition, he obviously played a blinder.  Well done Gerry.  8@??)(
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on March 21, 2017, 10:50:15 AM
Another post high on emotion and low on fact.  Where to begin?

Your opinion of what the PJ would and would not 'accept' is irrelevant, as is mine.  As is Kate's.  As is her lawyer's.

She was with her lawyer, so any process had to be legal, unless you think her lawyer was not up to the mark.

It matters not a jot what the aim of the PJ was.  It was an opportunity to progress the truth about Madeleine.  An opportunity which Kate spurned.

Kate put Kate above Madeleine.

Your post is totally biased
The questions were not designed to further the search for Maddie but to try and incriminate Kate
If that was not the case she case could have been interviewed as a witness
Kate did exactly the right thing and your suggestion that she put herself hove Maddie is tripe
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Benice on March 21, 2017, 10:50:59 AM
Another post high on emotion and low on fact.  Where to begin?

Your opinion of what the PJ would and would not 'accept' is irrelevant, as is mine.  As is Kate's.  As is her lawyer's.

She was with her lawyer, so any process had to be legal, unless you think her lawyer was not up to the mark.

It matters not a jot what the aim of the PJ was.  It was an opportunity to progress the truth about Madeleine.  An opportunity which Kate spurned.

Kate put Kate above Madeleine.

In your opinion.   In my opinion the PJ put pinning the crime on Kate above anything else - including Madeleine.

I cannot believe that anyone who has read the 48 questions can put any other interpretation on them.
IMO
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on March 21, 2017, 10:52:00 AM
Yes I am serious.  The only way Kate could have provided information to assist the police in finding Madeleine that she had not already given them is if she actually had some knowledge about where Madeleine had gone.  Do you think she possesses such information?
Try reading her first statement again.  No door slamming shut in the wind.  Consequently, there was a lot for Kate to say that had not already been said.

Turn your question on its head.  If Kate did not know where Madeleine had gone she was in no danger of incriminating herself.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alfie on March 21, 2017, 10:54:40 AM
Try reading her first statement again.  No door slamming shut in the wind.  Consequently, there was a lot for Kate to say that had not already been said.

Turn your question on its head.  If Kate did not know where Madeleine had gone she was in no danger of incriminating herself.
I have just given you an example of how answering leading questions can give the police ammunition to start building a case against you.  Fine you don't accept this.  Your choice.  As for doors slamming shut in the wind or not, was that one of the 48 questions, and if it was, how does the answer help find Madeleine, if Kate had no idea where she was?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on March 21, 2017, 11:00:52 AM
For example - Madeleine's sleeping habits at home or relationship with her mother - what relevance would this be in the case of stranger abduction?  They are only relevant if Kate is somehow involved.  Assuming Kate is not involved why should she answer such questions, and how does answering them help find an abductor?
Kate's first statement says that Madeleine was not on medication. 

Assuming you are actually referring to the 48 questions, Kate covered your points in her book.  So why on earth cover them in 2011 whilst bemoaning the lack of an investigation but fail to cover them in Sep 2007 when an active investigation was underway?

Your final question is disingenuous.  It wasn't up to Kate to set the interview agenda or to control which questions she would permit the PJ to ask.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on March 21, 2017, 11:01:33 AM
Try reading her first statement again.  No door slamming shut in the wind.  Consequently, there was a lot for Kate to say that had not already been said.

Turn your question on its head.  If Kate did not know where Madeleine had gone she was in no danger of incriminating herself.

very simplistic
Innocent people incriminate themselves and are jailed
That is a fact
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on March 21, 2017, 11:05:43 AM
Assuming Kate did not have a hand in her child's disappearance but imagine for a moment she answered - "yes Madeleine was a difficult child and had sleep problems" - there we have the beginnings of a glimmer of a motive.  Leading questions designed to self-incriminate.
Are you being serious?

Was Kate so unintelligent or inarticulate in Sep 2007 that she could not say in Sep 2007 what she wrote in her book in 2011?  Would you honestly have us believe that?

Sorry, I give this proposition a zero out of 10.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: faithlilly on March 21, 2017, 11:09:20 AM
I didn't say it would be different.  Gerry chose to answer the questions, his prerogative.  Clearly he didn't give the PJ any ammunition, he obviously played a blinder.  Well done Gerry.  8@??)(

Yet ten years down the line the SC have now stated both he and his wife cannot be considered innocent. Bit of a pyrrhic victory I'm sure you'll agree?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Robittybob1 on March 21, 2017, 11:12:57 AM
Yet ten years down the line the SC have now stated both he and his wife cannot be considered innocent. Bit of a pyrrhic victory I'm sure you'll agree?
That doesn't imply they are guilty either does it?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on March 21, 2017, 11:15:46 AM
very simplistic
Innocent people incriminate themselves and are jailed
That is a fact
Very simplistic yourself.

The logical outcome of your pearl of wisdom is that innocent people should never give information to the police on the basis it might incriminate them.  Which is nonsense.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on March 21, 2017, 11:23:58 AM
Your post is totally biased
The questions were not designed to further the search for Maddie but to try and incriminate Kate
If that was not the case she case could have been interviewed as a witness
Kate did exactly the right thing and your suggestion that she put herself hove Maddie is tripe
It doesn't matter a jot what the questions were designed to do.  Kate did not get to set the agenda or specify the questions to be asked.  Police interviews don't work that way, but it would appear a number of supporters think that should have been how it was done.

If Kate had answered the questions and achieved the same clean bill of health that Gerry had, then the PJ would have been forced to move on from that position.

And you know full well why Kate had to be interviewed as an arguido, so let's not head down that diversion.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: The Singularity on March 21, 2017, 11:45:42 AM
Kate's legal counsel was a contributing fact here so essentially, her brief gave her advice which she followed - who wouldn't do?

Foreign country, different systems, having a legal counsel to advise would be absolutely critical to finding Madeline and progressing the investigation because the legal counsel surely would not deliberately give advice to Mrs McCann that would in someway incriminate her?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alfie on March 21, 2017, 11:46:19 AM
Kate's first statement says that Madeleine was not on medication. 

Assuming you are actually referring to the 48 questions, Kate covered your points in her book.  So why on earth cover them in 2011 whilst bemoaning the lack of an investigation but fail to cover them in Sep 2007 when an active investigation was underway?

Your final question is disingenuous.  It wasn't up to Kate to set the interview agenda or to control which questions she would permit the PJ to ask.
Bizarre post.  She covered them in her book because she chose to, and wasn't under investigation by the police at the time, so not at any risk of incriminating herself in a criminal investigation or being thrown in the slammer.   Kate did control the interview agenda very well by refusing to answer any of the PJ's devious (and in some cases rather stupid) questions.  Good for her I say.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alfie on March 21, 2017, 11:57:36 AM
Very simplistic yourself.

The logical outcome of your pearl of wisdom is that innocent people should never give information to the police on the basis it might incriminate them.  Which is nonsense.
You should watch this then because not giving the police any information even if you are completely innocent is very good advice indeed.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8z7NC5sgik
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on March 21, 2017, 12:08:27 PM
Kate's legal counsel was a contributing fact here so essentially, her brief gave her advice which she followed - who wouldn't do?

Foreign country, different systems, having a legal counsel to advise would be absolutely critical to finding Madeline and progressing the investigation because the legal counsel surely would not deliberately give advice to Mrs McCann that would in someway incriminate her?
First, you have this from Kate.  Did her lawyer actually confirm this?

Second, you have the issue that Kate chose to answer certain questions whilst refusing to answer the bulk.  So why did she answer any questions whatsoever?  Did she do so with her lawyer's advice or against it?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: pathfinder73 on March 21, 2017, 12:12:39 PM
I didn't say it would be different.  Gerry chose to answer the questions, his prerogative.  Clearly he didn't give the PJ any ammunition, he obviously played a blinder.  Well done Gerry.  8@??)(

Pathetic. Robert Murat answered all questions (he didn't want a lawyer present) and wasn't stitched up. Gerry sat in with Kate for her first interview on 4 May (because of her mental health) and she didn't want to do a second interview on 10 May. When the time came for her to finally answer questions, she thought it was easier not to. Well done Kate treat yourself to a strawberry vodka but don't forget 10 years later they want to solve it at all costs for Madeleine ?>)()<

When asked if on any occasion Madeleine was injured, he says that he has no comments. GM

It's interesting to note who said, are you alright, when Madeleine fell on the plane steps.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Benice on March 21, 2017, 12:14:25 PM
Bizarre post.  She covered them in her book because she chose to, and wasn't under investigation by the police at the time, so not at any risk of incriminating herself in a criminal investigation or being thrown in the slammer.   Kate did control the interview agenda very well by refusing to answer any of the PJ's devious (and in some cases rather stupid) questions.  Good for her I say.

I'm glad it wasn't only me who read the 48 questions and was amazed at some of them.   I found it hard to believe that some had been devised by grown up professional policemen.        Apart from anything else they showed an abysmal lack of knowledge of information which should have been known to them already.

For instance - the question -  'What did ..''we let her down''..mean' - surely could have been explained to them in an instant - simply by asking the UK officers who had been with them for weeks.

It's noticeable that while sceptics are keen to point out the fact that Kate didn't answer the questions - they are not so keen to actually discuss them.   I'm not at all surprised.
AIMHO
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: The Singularity on March 21, 2017, 12:15:28 PM
First, you have this from Kate.  Did her lawyer actually confirm this?

Second, you have the issue that Kate chose to answer certain questions whilst refusing to answer the bulk.  So why did she answer any questions whatsoever?  Did she do so with her lawyer's advice or against it?

Mrs McCann's legal counsel is highly unlikely to confirm or deny anything regarding this aspect of their services - why do you think they would?

With regards to the highly publicized 48 questions, this interview was clearly conducted under the advisement of her legal counsel. Whether or not that was good legal advice remains to be seen however I strongly suspect that Mrs McCann adhered to her legal counsel during this interview and subsequent enquiries
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on March 21, 2017, 12:27:21 PM
Very simplistic yourself.

The logical outcome of your pearl of wisdom is that innocent people should never give information to the police on the basis it might incriminate them.  Which is nonsense.

Actual it isn't
Simplistic again
I'm referring to those suspected of a crime
There was an interesting case shown here of an American lawyer who actually incriminated himself during questioning
His advice was not to answer any questions
The questions Kate was asked were nothing to do with the search for Maddie
The pj had absolutely nothing on the McCanns and were looking for something
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: pathfinder73 on March 21, 2017, 12:43:58 PM
I'm glad it wasn't only me who read the 48 questions and was amazed at some of them.   I found it hard to believe that some had been devised by grown up professional policemen.        Apart from anything else they showed an abysmal lack of knowledge of information which should have been known to them already.

For instance - the question -  'What did ..''we let her down''..mean' - surely could have been explained to them in an instant - simply by asking the UK officers who had been with them for weeks.

It's noticeable that while sceptics are keen to point out the fact that Kate didn't answer the questions - they are not so keen to actually discuss them.   I'm not at all surprised.
AIMHO

If your child has disappeared you would get similar questions as a suspect. You can either answer them to help the police and clear yourself or not. Robert Murat answered ALL questions (not nice for him) and it wasn't his child. That would fill me with shame and embarrassment but they've never said that.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on March 21, 2017, 02:21:40 PM
Bizarre post.  She covered them in her book because she chose to, and wasn't under investigation by the police at the time, so not at any risk of incriminating herself in a criminal investigation or being thrown in the slammer.   Kate did control the interview agenda very well by refusing to answer any of the PJ's devious (and in some cases rather stupid) questions.  Good for her I say.
'Bizarre' seems to be the flavour of the week with some supporters, which is revealing.

If Kate set the agenda why was she muttering f***ing t**sers under her breath.  Was that meant to help Madeleine?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alfie on March 21, 2017, 02:26:15 PM
'Bizarre' seems to be the flavour of the week with some supporters, which is revealing.

If Kate set the agenda why was she muttering f***ing t**sers under her breath.  Was that meant to help Madeleine?
Oh do grow up.  This obsession with 'f..king tossers' is utterly childish and does you know favours whatsoever.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on March 21, 2017, 02:31:16 PM
You should watch this then because not giving the police any information even if you are completely innocent is very good advice indeed.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8z7NC5sgik
'not giving the police any information even if you are completely innocent'.  My apologies in advance, but if this is you being serious re Kate on Madeleine then I can only assume you side with Kate and Madeleine's fate is of little import.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on March 21, 2017, 02:33:51 PM
I'm glad it wasn't only me who read the 48 questions and was amazed at some of them.   I found it hard to believe that some had been devised by grown up professional policemen.        Apart from anything else they showed an abysmal lack of knowledge of information which should have been known to them already.

For instance - the question -  'What did ..''we let her down''..mean' - surely could have been explained to them in an instant - simply by asking the UK officers who had been with them for weeks.

It's noticeable that while sceptics are keen to point out the fact that Kate didn't answer the questions - they are not so keen to actually discuss them.   I'm not at all surprised.
AIMHO
If such a thread exists, point me at it.  If not, start one up and I will be happy to join in.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on March 21, 2017, 02:38:47 PM
Mrs McCann's legal counsel is highly unlikely to confirm or deny anything regarding this aspect of their services - why do you think they would?

With regards to the highly publicized 48 questions, this interview was clearly conducted under the advisement of her legal counsel. Whether or not that was good legal advice remains to be seen however I strongly suspect that Mrs McCann adhered to her legal counsel during this interview and subsequent enquiries
The lawyer was quick enough to point out that an alleged plea-bargain was in fact no such thing.

However, in the absence of supporting evidence, we are down to taking Kate's word for it that she was advised not to answer questions.  The fact that she answered the ones she wanted to answer is the tricky bit.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on March 21, 2017, 02:45:23 PM
Actual it isn't
Simplistic again
I'm referring to those suspected of a crime
There was an interesting case shown here of an American lawyer who actually incriminated himself during questioning
His advice was not to answer any questions
The questions Kate was asked were nothing to do with the search for Maddie
The pj had absolutely nothing on the McCanns and were looking for something
It would have helped if you'd made that clear the first time.

Gerry was also made an arguido.  You appear to be suggesting he should have answered nothing.   Silly Gerry?

How would that have helped Madeleine?

I wonder if the 4 people made arguidos in July 2014 were smart enough to adopt your advice.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alfie on March 21, 2017, 02:47:30 PM
'not giving the police any information even if you are completely innocent'.  My apologies in advance, but if this is you being serious re Kate on Madeleine then I can only assume you side with Kate and Madeleine's fate is of little import.
I don't think Kate had anything to do with Madeleine's disappearance, therefore I don't see how answering 1 question or 20000 questions is going to reveal Madeleine's whereabouts or fate.  I DO think the PJ were hoping to get Kate to incriminate herself so that they could have grounds to press charges.  My opinion.  Please stop your insinuations that I care nothing for Madeleine's fate, you are wrong and are being offensive IMO.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: faithlilly on March 21, 2017, 02:57:38 PM
I don't think Kate had anything to do with Madeleine's disappearance, therefore I don't see how answering 1 question or 20000 questions is going to reveal Madeleine's whereabouts or fate.  I DO think the PJ were hoping to get Kate to incriminate herself so that they could have grounds to press charges.  My opinion.  Please stop your insinuations that I care nothing for Madeleine's fate, you are wrong and are being offensive IMO.

If she was absolutely honest how could Kate incriminate herself?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on March 21, 2017, 03:07:12 PM
Oh do grow up.  This obsession with 'f....ing tossers' is utterly childish and does you know favours whatsoever.
If you ignore the facts, your claim that Kate set the agenda or controlled the interview might be worthy of consideration.  However, the fact is that Kate herself evidenced that she was not in control.  And I have less of an 'obsession' with f ts than Kate does.  I wouldn't have known of it Kate had not published it.  Would you?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alfie on March 21, 2017, 03:27:22 PM
If she was absolutely honest how could Kate incriminate herself?
I have already given an example of how earlier in this thread.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on March 21, 2017, 03:28:00 PM
I don't think Kate had anything to do with Madeleine's disappearance, therefore I don't see how answering 1 question or 20000 questions is going to reveal Madeleine's whereabouts or fate.  I DO think the PJ were hoping to get Kate to incriminate herself so that they could have grounds to press charges.  My opinion.  Please stop your insinuations that I care nothing for Madeleine's fate, you are wrong and are being offensive IMO.
I have a list of questions that Kate and Gerry could answer, that would help in the search for Madeleine, and that have no potential to incriminate the McCanns.

Here's 3.

Was the OC driver who ferried them from OC reception to 5A younger or older?

Did the said driver enter 5A to help them with their luggage?

What route was taken to get from reception to 5A on Sat 28 May?

The first relates to when the said driver first clocked Madeleine and then connected her to 5A.  Tick-tock on a planned abduction.

The second relates to whether the driver's DNA might be amongst the unidentified DNA retrieved from 5A.

The 3rd is a check on whether the traffic routing was normal or not.  In addition, it relates to whether the first GNR unit drove past 5A to get to the OC reception on 3 May 2007.

The McCanns probably have little idea of the importance of these questions.  Perhaps Op G is better informed, though I have no great hope.

And absolutely nothing in there to incriminate the McCanns.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alfie on March 21, 2017, 03:36:03 PM
I have a list of questions that Kate and Gerry could answer, that would help in the search for Madeleine, and that have no potential to incriminate the McCanns.

Here's 3.

Was the OC driver who ferried them from OC reception to 5A younger or older?

Did the said driver enter 5A to help them with their luggage?

What route was taken to get from reception to 5A on Sat 28 May?

The first relates to when the said driver first clocked Madeleine and then connected her to 5A.  Tick-tock on a planned abduction.

The second relates to whether the driver's DNA might be amongst the unidentified DNA retrieved from 5A.

The 3rd is a check on whether the traffic routing was normal or not.  In addition, it relates to whether the first GNR unit drove past 5A to get to the OC reception on 3 May 2007.

The McCanns probably have little idea of the importance of these questions.  Perhaps Op G is better informed, though I have no great hope.

And absolutely nothing in there to incriminate the McCanns.
Younger or older than what? 
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Brietta on March 21, 2017, 03:42:30 PM
Why does one care if one assesses the questions as 'designed to assist' or not?  The opportunity existed for Kate to influence PJ thinking.  She did not take it.  Or rather, her influence was negative.

I had a rather curious incident about a month ago.  I was 'accused' by a neighbour of ringing his door bell and then departing.  Quite clearly, my neighbour believed I had done this.  I took the opportunity to assert that I had not touched his door bell (which was true) and he was forced to accept this.  What he thinks internally - who knows.

Kate's situation was the same, though obviously more important.  If she had done a Gerry and answered all the questions, then it may have influenced the investigation in a positive manner.  As she didn't answer most of the questions, we will never know.

Hmmm ... do you have independent witnesses to attest you did not ring the door bell?

No smoke without fire ... did you ring the doorbell, then have a false memory that you did not?

Kate had already failed to influence the Policia Judiciaria thinking while being questioned by them for many hours as a witness the day before she was constituted an arguida.

Witness = placed her under an obligation to answer all questions put to her.
Arguida = the right to be questioned in the presence of her lawyer and the right to remain silent.

If you read through the questions put to Kate McCann (arguida) and compare them to the questions asked the day before of Kate McCann (witness) ... with the proviso you cannot, because we have not seen that transcript ... you may notice the oft repeated sentence,
" Kate McCann said she could not explain anything more than she already had."

When did she explain anything?  Quite obviously during the marathon grilling session the previous day during which she was obliged to answer all questions put to her.
The questions had been asked and answered ~ not only did they fail to give any answers as far as Madeleine's investigation was concerned but could not be used in the PJ investigation against her.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Brietta on March 21, 2017, 03:48:58 PM
Gerry answered all the questions put to him and I believe he is still a free man.

They were not interested in Gerry.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Brietta on March 21, 2017, 03:51:29 PM
Unfortunately, your post is high on emotion and low on fact.

First, prior to being made arguidos, the McCanns had published that they were returning to England.  If they had done this move a bit faster, it is probable that they would not have been made arguidos.

Second, having been made arguidos, they were not restricted in their movement.  Specifically, they were free to return to England, and that is what they rapidly did.

Third, a life was at stake.  Madeleine's, not Kate's.

If you wish to defend a mother who spurned the opportunity to advance the search for Madeleine, go for it.  This tells me that you are raising Kate's circumstances above those of Madeleine.  And that is an arrangement I firmly reject.

How much assistance would Madeleine have received with her mother incarcerated in a Portuguese prison?  More or less than Joana Cipriano?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on March 21, 2017, 03:54:20 PM
Hmmm ... do you have independent witnesses to attest you did not ring the door bell?

No smoke without fire ... did you ring the doorbell, then have a false memory that you did not?

Kate had already failed to influence the Policia Judiciaria thinking while being questioned by them for many hours as a witness the day before she was constituted an arguida.

Witness = placed her under an obligation to answer all questions put to her.
Arguida = the right to be questioned in the presence of her lawyer and the right to remain silent.

If you read through the questions put to Kate McCann (arguida) and compare them to the questions asked the day before of Kate McCann (witness) ... with the proviso you cannot, because we have not seen that transcript ... you may notice the oft repeated sentence,
" Kate McCann said she could not explain anything more than she already had."

When did she explain anything?  Quite obviously during the marathon grilling session the previous day during which she was obliged to answer all questions put to her.
The questions had been asked and answered ~ not only did they fail to give any answers as far as Madeleine's investigation was concerned but could not be used in the PJ investigation against her.
Does my neighbour have independent evidence that his doorbell was rung?  Given that there was no-one else on the street, I am of the opinion that his doorbell was not rung.

Kate's interview the day before is on file.  Why shouldn't it be?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alfie on March 21, 2017, 03:56:16 PM
This is the type of reply that makes me question if you are being serious.  You stated out with Kate controlling the interview, now you have switched to self-control, and you are asking us to believe that muttering f ts under her breath is what one does to keep calm.  I think that defines unbelievable.

Pity she didn't write 'bread and butter' in her book, isn't it?
I have not switched anything, Kate controlled the interview by giving the PJ nothing, Kate controlled her emotions using a well-known calming technique of repeating a mantra (the words you repeat don't really need to mean anything), if you don't understand this then that's probably because you have no understanding or empathy (you did once claim not to have any so I'm not saying anything you haven't already admitted to), and that's your problem not mine.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on March 21, 2017, 03:58:48 PM
How much assistance would Madeleine have received with her mother incarcerated in a Portuguese prison?  More or less than Joana Cipriano?
That's a superhuman leap of imagination.  The McCanns were unrestricted by arguido-dom.  Not a hint of a Portuguese prison in sight.

And with all due respect, this interview is completely unlike the Cipriano case, so I will not follow that diversion.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on March 21, 2017, 04:13:44 PM
I have not switched anything, Kate controlled the interview by giving the PJ nothing, Kate controlled her emotions using a well-known calming technique of repeating a mantra (the words you repeat don't really need to mean anything), if you don't understand this then that's probably because you have no understanding or empathy (you did once claim not to have any so I'm not saying anything you haven't already admitted to), and that's your problem not mine.
I know enough about the working of the brain to know that the words used are extremely important.  Words and brain function are linked.

Your assertion that the words are irrelevant is simply incorrect.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: stephen25000 on March 21, 2017, 04:14:02 PM
How much assistance would Madeleine have received with her mother incarcerated in a Portuguese prison?  More or less than Joana Cipriano?

So your view would be that if women are found guilty of a crime, and have children, they shouldn't do time ?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on March 21, 2017, 04:48:55 PM
Terribly sorry but the SUN will have to do ...

Maddie hunt: Send in dogs The Sun
 
By Ian Hepburn and John Askill
Published: 23 May 2007
 
Stubborn Portuguese police chiefs are refusing to let the world's best sniffer dogs join the hunt for Madeleine McCann.
 
Senior British cops last night urged officers leading the inquiry to accept help from UK dog teams before it is too late.
 
Two dogs attached to Britain's National Policing Improvement Agency have developed such powerful tracking skills they can follow a scent for miles, even one up to 28 days old.
 
By sniffing an item of Maddie's clothing, they could trace a trail that might finally unlock the mystery of the four-year-old's disappearance.
 
Police in the Algarve appear no nearer to finding Maddie 20 days after she was snatched from her bed in the family's holiday apartment in Praia da Luz. But the sniffer dogs are still being snubbed.
 
A senior UK police source said: "It is an absolute scandal, time is fast running out for this little girl.
 
"These dogs have immense capability. Their tracking skills are among the finest in the world.
 
"The dogs were put on standby to go to the Algarve within days of Madeleine’s disappearance.
 
"You would expect the Portuguese to make use of the best resources available to them, but they repeatedly ignore the offers of assistance."
 
The dogs include a spaniel whose sense of smell is so keen she can sniff traces of blood on a weapon even after it has been scrubbed clean.
 
But the source warned: "They work most effectively within a 28-day time frame. After that the scent becomes much weaker."
 
Other British dog-handling teams did join the initial search for Maddie, and local cops later reported that dogs found a scent, but the trail was lost after 250 yards.
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id157.htm
Many thanks.   8((()*/
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: slartibartfast on March 21, 2017, 05:44:06 PM
There seems to be a suggestion from the supporters that Kate and Gerry out smarted the PJ with their respective answering strategies.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Robittybob1 on March 21, 2017, 05:48:29 PM
Gerry answered all the questions put to him and I believe he is still a free man.
Did he answer them all correctly?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on March 21, 2017, 05:50:40 PM
There seems to be a suggestion from the supporters that Kate and Gerry out smarted the PJ with their respective answering strategies.

I think there is more than a suggestion that Jate & Kerry outsmart the whole goddamn world on a daily basis.
"You just wait til they come out fighting" comes the cry not infrequently. Which is bizarre considering how many times they have been dumped on the canvas.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Robittybob1 on March 21, 2017, 06:19:21 PM
Then it would have been different for Kate because.......?
Kate is as free as Gerry, what is the difference?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on March 21, 2017, 06:58:50 PM
I think there is more than a suggestion that Jate & Kerry outsmart the whole goddamn world on a daily basis.
"You just wait til they come out fighting" comes the cry not infrequently. Which is bizarre considering how many times they have been dumped on the canvas.

They have always won in the Uk
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: G-Unit on March 21, 2017, 09:44:42 PM
They have always won in the Uk

Thanks to high powered lawyers, media managers and injunctions.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: faithlilly on March 21, 2017, 09:58:22 PM
Thanks to high powered lawyers, media managers and injunctions.

Have they actually 'won' anything. Surely all their victories have been settled out of court? In fact the only time they actually saw the inside of a court was to try and prise confidential information from the Leceistershire police and we all know how that ended.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on March 21, 2017, 10:16:38 PM
Have they actually 'won' anything. Surely all their victories been settled out of court? In fact the only time they actually saw the inside of a court was to try and prise confidential information from the Leceistershire police and we all know how that ended.

I believe you are right. The Mitchell choreographed piccy on the steps of the big court in The Strand notwithstanding.

Were anything "won" out of court on the basis of the representation that the archiving process found them
innocent, then as that  postulation has now been holed below the water line there may be someone floating about who will want to revisit that situation.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alfie on March 21, 2017, 10:31:18 PM
There seems to be a suggestion from the supporters that Kate and Gerry out smarted the PJ with their respective answering strategies.
If you truly believe that the McCanns had a hand in their child's disappearance then you would have to concede that they have played an absolute blinder.   They are free and with very little likelihood of this changing any time soon. If you truly believe they dunnit then yes, they proper outsmarted the PJ.  And by not playing ball with the PJ and their daft questions Kate certainly denied them even an inch of rope to hang her with.  Smart? Deffo.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: slartibartfast on March 21, 2017, 10:33:36 PM
If you truly believe that the McCanns had a hand in their child's disappearance then you would have to concede that they have played an absolute blinder.   They are free and with very little likelihood of this changing any time soon. If you truly believe they dunnit then yes, they proper outsmarted the PJ.  And by not playing ball with the PJ and their daft questions Kate certainly denied them even an inch of rope to hang her with.  Smart? Deffo.

...and if they are totally innocent what has their strategy achieved?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on March 21, 2017, 10:42:56 PM
If you truly believe that the McCanns had a hand in their child's disappearance then you would have to concede that they have played an absolute blinder.   They are free and with very little likelihood of this changing any time soon. If you truly believe they dunnit then yes, they proper outsmarted the PJ. And by not playing ball with the PJ and their daft questions Kate certainly denied them even an inch of rope to hang her with.  Smart? Deffo.
&%+((£
Do you mean this was just an exercise to outsmart the PJ from the get go?
Blimey!
As a strict business deal it was crap though. Even forgetting where the dosh came from, lobbing out the fat end of £3MM to finish up in worse position than when you started.........

Some days one is the bug somedays one is the windshield. The trick, Alfie old stick, is not to take it personally or one loses objectivity.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alfie on March 21, 2017, 10:56:51 PM
...and if they are totally innocent what has their strategy achieved?
If they are totally innocent then no matter what "strategy" they adopted it wouldn't have made the blindest bit of difference into the investigation into Madeleine's disappearance.  If they didn't do it then that means they have no information about where she is or what happened to her, do you understand that?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: slartibartfast on March 21, 2017, 11:00:14 PM
If they are totally innocent then no matter what "strategy" they adopted it wouldn't have made the blindest bit of difference into the investigation into Madeleine's disappearance.  If they didn't do it then that means they have no information about where she is or what happened to her, do you understand that?

Do you understand that anything extra that may have come out if the questions were answered may have helped find out what happened to Madeleine? You are not in a position to know what difference it would have made.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Brietta on March 21, 2017, 11:10:34 PM
Do you understand that anything extra that may have come out if the questions were answered may have helped find out what happened to Madeleine? You are not in a position to know what difference it would have made.

You obviously have not worked it out yet that the object of the exercise had nothing at all to do with Madeleine McCann.

Kate McCann was the focus. 

Kate McCann was the arguida.  It was decided that Kate McCann was to do time and thus solve the case ... just as Joana Cipriano's case had been solved.

In the year of our Lord 2017 we are receiving an object lesson on precisely how close a shave she had from Portuguese justice.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: slartibartfast on March 21, 2017, 11:19:48 PM
You obviously have not worked it out yet that the object of the exercise had nothing at all to do with Madeleine McCann.

Kate McCann was the focus. 

Kate McCann was the arguida.  It was decided that Kate McCann was to do time and thus solve the case ... just as Joana Cipriano's case had been solved.

In the year of our Lord 2017 we are receiving an object lesson on precisely how close a shave she had from Portuguese justice.

Just consider for a moment that the PJ were genuinely trying to find out what happened to Madeleine, anyone having an attitude like yours does not help them in that direction at all.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alfie on March 21, 2017, 11:36:23 PM
Do you understand that anything extra that may have come out if the questions were answered may have helped find out what happened to Madeleine? You are not in a position to know what difference it would have made.
Perhaps you could quote one of the 48 questions Kate didn't answer that would have helped further an investigation  into a stranger abduction. 
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alfie on March 21, 2017, 11:37:49 PM
Just consider for a moment that the PJ were genuinely trying to find out what happened to Madeleine, anyone having an attitude like yours does not help them in that direction at all.
They suspected Kate was involved, so if she was innocent, how does interogating her help?  She can't prove her innocence can she?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Brietta on March 21, 2017, 11:43:58 PM
Just consider for a moment that the PJ were genuinely trying to find out what happened to Madeleine, anyone having an attitude like yours does not help them in that direction at all.

When was it the PJ threw the towel in on Madeleine.

Was it on the fourth of May according to Amaral?  Or was it a bit later when Ricardo Paiva took up interpreting dreams?

Constituting Kate McCann arguida without a shred of supporting evidence ... was intended to help Madeleine in what way?

Instead of pontificating on my attitude ... be a little more self aware regarding yours.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Robittybob1 on March 22, 2017, 06:20:56 AM
When was it the PJ threw the towel in on Madeleine.

Was it on the fourth of May according to Amaral?  Or was it a bit later when Ricardo Paiva took up interpreting dreams?

Constituting Kate McCann arguida without a shred of supporting evidence ... was intended to help Madeleine in what way?

Instead of pontificating on my attitude ... be a little more self aware regarding yours.
it is a mess which ever way you look at it.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: The Singularity on March 22, 2017, 02:11:11 PM
I see quite a few people suggesting that Mrs McCann's reluctance to answer questions, which was her right to do so, was in someway hampering the investigation into finding Madeleine. Would I dare even to suggest that some are trading the path indicating that her reluctance was done out of guilt?

Given that in part or all is correct, what exactly would you expect Mr McCann to do in her position faced with a hostile interview situation?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on March 22, 2017, 02:22:47 PM
I see quite a few people suggesting that Mrs McCann's reluctance to answer questions, which was her right to do so, was in someway hampering the investigation into finding Madeleine. Would I dare even to suggest that some are trading the path indicating that her reluctance was done out of guilt?

Given that in part or all is correct, what exactly would you expect Mr McCann to do in her position faced with a hostile interview situation?
Do I think Kate not answering hampered the search for Madeleine. Yes.

Do I think Kate's motive was guilt?  I cannot possibly decide in the absence of evidence.

What would I expect Gerry to do?  I have no evidence of his guilt or innocence.  I have no idea who his lawyer was.  I have no idea what advice he was given.  Accordingly, I will not trot out idle speculation.

Why is this post put through the lens of Kate and Gerry, and not through the lens of Madeleine?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: jassi on March 22, 2017, 02:32:41 PM
Is not police questioning under caution (or equivalent) invariably hostile ?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Eleanor on March 22, 2017, 02:51:22 PM
I see quite a few people suggesting that Mrs McCann's reluctance to answer questions, which was her right to do so, was in someway hampering the investigation into finding Madeleine. Would I dare even to suggest that some are trading the path indicating that her reluctance was done out of guilt?

Given that in part or all is correct, what exactly would you expect Mr McCann to do in her position faced with a hostile interview situation?

I don't think this indicates guilt, and nor do I think those questions, some of which she had already answered as a witness, would have helped to find Madeleine.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Brietta on March 22, 2017, 03:19:38 PM
Do I think Kate not answering hampered the search for Madeleine. Yes.

Do I think Kate's motive was guilt?  I cannot possibly decide in the absence of evidence.

What would I expect Gerry to do?  I have no evidence of his guilt or innocence.  I have no idea who his lawyer was.  I have no idea what advice he was given.  Accordingly, I will not trot out idle speculation.

Why is this post put through the lens of Kate and Gerry, and not through the lens of Madeleine?

You may have been puzzled that your neighbour accused you of something you were very well aware you had not done.

Had it been an offence for which the penalty was incarceration and resulted in you being constituted arguido and questioned as such ... would you be content with that and dispense with your rights or would you be slightly miffed and fight the accusation tooth and nail?

It is all about Madeleine.  Very surprising that you cannot see that.

Without her parents Madeleine had nothing and no-one in her corner.

She had been written off and declared dead by the police.  Their reasoning for that was exceedingly flawed.  Their evidence to support that was non existent.

The McCann's life and that of their family is defined by their love for Madeleine and their desire to find her.  The police may have written her off ... her parents never will until whatever happened to her is resolved.

When they were erroneously constituted arguidos Kate and Gerry not only had to fight for themselves and what remained of their family unit but they were all there was to fight for Madeleine ... and that is exactly what they did.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on March 22, 2017, 03:39:13 PM
You may have been puzzled that your neighbour accused you of something you were very well aware you had not done.

Had it been an offence for which the penalty was incarceration and resulted in you being constituted arguido and questioned as such ... would you be content with that and dispense with your rights or would you be slightly miffed and fight the accusation tooth and nail?

It is all about Madeleine.  Very surprising that you cannot see that.

Without her parents Madeleine had nothing and no-one in her corner.

She had been written off and declared dead by the police.  Their reasoning for that was exceedingly flawed.  Their evidence to support that was non existent.

The McCann's life and that of their family is defined by their love for Madeleine and their desire to find her.  The police may have written her off ... her parents never will until whatever happened to her is resolved.

When they were erroneously constituted arguidos Kate and Gerry not only had to fight for themselves and what remained of their family unit but they were all there was to fight for Madeleine ... and that is exactly what they did.
I can say without hesitation that if one of my children or grandchildren here disappeared, and I was given arguido status, I would be happy to dispense with a lawyer and I would answer every question put to me, given that updating the police accurately would optimise the chances of finding my child.

I cannot be incriminated if I am innocent, regardless of what the video purports.

Anything less than full disclosure was sub-optimal for Madeleine.  It might have ticked the box for Kate, but that is not good enough.  Madeleine got raw deal #2.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on March 22, 2017, 03:51:57 PM
I can say without hesitation that if one of my children or grandchildren here disappeared, and I was given arguido status, I would be happy to dispense with a lawyer and I would answer every question put to me, given that updating the police accurately would optimise the chances of finding my child.

I cannot be incriminated if I am innocent, regardless of what the video purports.

Anything less than full disclosure was sub-optimal for Madeleine.  It might have ticked the box for Kate, but that is not good enough.  Madeleine got raw deal #2.

Totally naive and incorrect
To suggest an innocent person cannot incriminate themselves shows a total lack of understanding of reality
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on March 22, 2017, 04:00:01 PM
Totally naive and incorrect
To suggest an innocent person cannot incriminate themselves shows a total lack of understanding of reality
Do you have anything to add to the debate in this thread?  Or does your post really represent your best effort?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on March 22, 2017, 04:09:19 PM
Do you have anything to add to the debate in this thread?  Or does your post really represent your best effort?

I am commenting on your post which is obviously incorrect
John himself was locked up and he was innocent
Your post shows a distinct failure to understand reality and puts your posts and opinion into perspective
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: John on March 22, 2017, 04:17:56 PM
I can say without hesitation that if one of my children or grandchildren here disappeared, and I was given arguido status, I would be happy to dispense with a lawyer and I would answer every question put to me, given that updating the police accurately would optimise the chances of finding my child.

I cannot be incriminated if I am innocent, regardless of what the video purports.

Anything less than full disclosure was sub-optimal for Madeleine.  It might have ticked the box for Kate, but that is not good enough.  Madeleine got raw deal #2.

I must say that is my own thinking.  Had my kid disappeared I would be too busy looking for him or her to worry about bloody lawyers.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on March 22, 2017, 04:20:44 PM
I must say that is my own thinking.  Had my kid disappeared I would be too busy looking for him or her to worry about bloody lawyers.
The point is can an innocent person incriminate themselves
The answer is yes
And if you did incriminate  yourself and were locked up you would not be able to look for your child
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: slartibartfast on March 22, 2017, 04:31:49 PM
The point is can an innocent person incriminate themselves
The answer is yes
And if you did incriminate  yourself and were locked up you would not be able to look for your child

Can you provide cites for any of that?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on March 22, 2017, 04:35:50 PM
Can you provide cites for any of that?
which would you like cites for
Presumably you agree that if you were locked up you would not be able to look for your child
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: slartibartfast on March 22, 2017, 04:42:05 PM
which would you like cites for
Presumably you agree that if you were locked up you would not be able to look for your child

Innocent people incriminating themselves, let us exclude those with mental issues.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on March 22, 2017, 04:44:55 PM
Innocent people incriminating themselves, let us exclude those with mental issues.

So just the one cite required
Will post tomorrow when I'm on my laptop
The idea that innocent people cannot incriminate themselves is extremely naive
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: slartibartfast on March 22, 2017, 05:02:14 PM
So just the one cite required
Will post tomorrow when I'm on my laptop
The idea that innocent people cannot incriminate themselves is extremely naive

One would be a start.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on March 22, 2017, 05:07:05 PM
One would be a start.

I'm not in the uk and in a hotel with poor internet
So you think the right to silence is to protect the guilty and not to protect the innocent
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Robittybob1 on March 22, 2017, 05:11:14 PM
So just the one cite required
Will post tomorrow when I'm on my laptop
The idea that innocent people cannot incriminate themselves is extremely naive
Could be hard to prove.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on March 22, 2017, 05:13:57 PM
Could be hard to prove.

It's not hard to prove at all
Tell me why you think there is a right to silence
There's your proof
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: slartibartfast on March 22, 2017, 05:29:30 PM
It's not hard to prove at all
Tell me why you think there is a right to silence
There's your proof

The right to silence is there so people don't have to incriminate themselves. The question of innocence doesn't come into it.

It is impossible for an innocent person telling the whole truth to incriminate themselves.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on March 22, 2017, 05:35:34 PM
The right to silence is there so people don't have to incriminate themselves. The question of innocence doesn't come into it.

It is impossible for an innocent person telling the whole truth to incriminate themselves.

So innocent people cannot incriminate themselves if they tell the whole truth
What about if they have a slight lapse in memory
Are pressurised by sophisticated interrogation techniques into making a mistake
Could they incriminate themselves then
Of course they could
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on March 22, 2017, 05:41:58 PM
So innocent people cannot incriminate themselves if they tell the whole truth
What about if they have a slight lapse in memory
Are pressurised by sophisticated interrogation techniques into making a mistake
Could they incriminate themselves then
Of course they could
Are you now alleging that the PJ were using sophisticated interrogation techniques, in order to pressurise Kate into making a mistake?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alfie on March 22, 2017, 05:45:42 PM
I can say without hesitation that if one of my children or grandchildren here disappeared, and I was given arguido status, I would be happy to dispense with a lawyer and I would answer every question put to me, given that updating the police accurately would optimise the chances of finding my child.

I cannot be incriminated if I am innocent, regardless of what the video purports.

Anything less than full disclosure was sub-optimal for Madeleine.  It might have ticked the box for Kate, but that is not good enough.  Madeleine got raw deal #2.
I'm till waiting to hear which of the 48 questions would have elicited answers that would have helped find Madeleine,, presuming Kate is telling the truth and she had nothing to do with Madeleine's disappearance.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alfie on March 22, 2017, 05:51:15 PM
Innocent people incriminating themselves, let us exclude those with mental issues.
Here's one just off the top of my head

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_Evans
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Brietta on March 22, 2017, 05:53:20 PM
I can say without hesitation that if one of my children or grandchildren here disappeared, and I was given arguido status, I would be happy to dispense with a lawyer and I would answer every question put to me, given that updating the police accurately would optimise the chances of finding my child.

I cannot be incriminated if I am innocent, regardless of what the video purports.

Anything less than full disclosure was sub-optimal for Madeleine.  It might have ticked the box for Kate, but that is not good enough.  Madeleine got raw deal #2.

The McCanns had bared their souls ... " ... why didn't you come when we were crying last night?".  Why would you assume they would do less for their flesh and blood than you?

Have you given any consideration as to exactly how you would go about assisting your children or grandchildren while incarcerated as their murderer in a Portuguese jail?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on March 23, 2017, 12:05:29 AM
Are you now alleging that the PJ were using sophisticated interrogation techniques, in order to pressurise Kate into making a mistake?

You really are naive
That is exactly what every police force does
Ask questions over and over
Tire the suspect out looking for a mistake
Kate had already been answering questions for hours
She was now not answering questions as a witness but as an arguidos
If I remember correctly she was expecting to be arrested
She needed her freedom to help maddie
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Robittybob1 on March 23, 2017, 06:40:56 AM
Here's one just off the top of my head

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_Evans
very good example.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alfie on March 23, 2017, 09:39:12 AM
The right to silence is there so people don't have to incriminate themselves. The question of innocence doesn't come into it.

It is impossible for an innocent person telling the whole truth to incriminate themselves.
Truthful statements by an innocent person[edit]

An incriminating statement includes any statement that tends to increase the danger that the person making the statement will be accused, charged or prosecuted – even if the statement is true, and even if the person is innocent of any crime. Thus, even a person who is innocent of any crime who testifies truthfully can be incriminated by that testimony. The United States Supreme Court has stated that the Fifth Amendment privilege:
protects the innocent as well as the guilty.... one of the Fifth Amendment’s basic functions . . . is to protect innocent men . . . who otherwise might be ensnared by ambiguous circumstances..... truthful responses of an innocent witness, as well as those of a wrongdoer, may provide the government with incriminating evidence from the speaker’s own mouth.[12]
The U.S. Supreme Court has also stated:
Too many, even those who should be better advised, view this privilege as a shelter for wrongdoers. They too readily assume that those who invoke it are either guilty of crime or commit perjury in claiming the privilege.[13]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-incrimination
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on March 23, 2017, 01:40:51 PM
it is absolutely ridiculous for posters to claim that the innocent cannot incriminate themselves...it shows how poorly they understand the mccanns situation
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: slartibartfast on March 23, 2017, 03:02:10 PM
it is absolutely ridiculous for posters to claim that the innocent cannot incriminate themselves...it shows how poorly they understand the mccanns situation

I think I understand the McCann's situation.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Eleanor on March 23, 2017, 03:11:28 PM

It is certainly possible to say something which might incriminate oneself, especially if the investigation is on the wrong track.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on March 23, 2017, 03:17:18 PM
I think I understand the McCann's situation.

If you don't understand an innocent person can incriminate themselves then you don't understand anything
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alfie on March 23, 2017, 06:50:09 PM
I think I understand the McCann's situation.
Do share.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: ferryman on March 23, 2017, 08:02:05 PM
Truthful statements by an innocent person[edit]

An incriminating statement includes any statement that tends to increase the danger that the person making the statement will be accused, charged or prosecuted – even if the statement is true, and even if the person is innocent of any crime. Thus, even a person who is innocent of any crime who testifies truthfully can be incriminated by that testimony. The United States Supreme Court has stated that the Fifth Amendment privilege:
protects the innocent as well as the guilty.... one of the Fifth Amendment’s basic functions . . . is to protect innocent men . . . who otherwise might be ensnared by ambiguous circumstances..... truthful responses of an innocent witness, as well as those of a wrongdoer, may provide the government with incriminating evidence from the speaker’s own mouth.[12]
The U.S. Supreme Court has also stated:
Too many, even those who should be better advised, view this privilege as a shelter for wrongdoers. They too readily assume that those who invoke it are either guilty of crime or commit perjury in claiming the privilege.[13]


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-incrimination

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/350/422/case.html
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: pathfinder73 on March 28, 2017, 01:52:22 AM
Gerry made a big point of the length of his second police interview on 10 May in his blog when writing about Kate's second interview 4 months later.

"Everyone will know that Kate attended for interview as a witness with the Portuguese police today. This is only the second time Kate has been interviewed and although it was a long day, going on past midnight, this was shorter than my second interview which lasted 13 hours! " GM Blog 6 Sept 07

Gerry interview lasted 13 hours soon after his daughter's disappearance. Poor thing - please give him a medal or something for his monumental effort in answering police questions ?{)(**  His daughter was missing for over 4 months at the time of writing this blog so who gives a flying f*** about 13 hours Gerry except you!
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on March 28, 2017, 02:14:51 AM
Gerry made a big point of the length of his second police interview on 10 May in his blog when writing about Kate's second interview 4 months later.

"Everyone will know that Kate attended for interview as a witness with the Portuguese police today. This is only the second time Kate has been interviewed and although it was a long day, going on past midnight, this was shorter than my second interview which lasted 13 hours! " GM Blog 6 Sept 07

Gerry interview lasted 13 hours soon after his daughter's disappearance. Poor thing - please give him a medal or something for his monumental effort in answering police questions ?{)(**  His daughter was missing for over 4 months at the time of writing this blog so who gives a flying f*** about 13 hours Gerry except you!

It does correct the lie that the McCanns did not co operate with the pj
As I have posted before the 48 questions were just being used to wear Kate down in the hope she would incriminate herself
If she had answered those there would have been another 48 useless questions
The McCanns had already told the pj all they knew
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Robittybob1 on March 28, 2017, 03:01:55 AM
It does correct the lie that the McCanns did not co operate with the pj
As I have posted before the 48 questions were just being used to wear Kate down in the hope she would incriminate herself
If she had answered those there would have been another 48 useless questions
The McCanns had already told the pj all they knew
It is not possible to tell what a person knows.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Robittybob1 on December 12, 2017, 01:06:28 AM
Absolutely true, refusing to answer the simplest of questions, avoiding a reconstruction and generally being obstructive and abusive to police officers has never been seen in policing circles as being conducive with innocence.
Once being made arguido it was their right to refuse to answer questions.
I don't believe the McCanns were the main players blocking a reconstruction being done.
Being abusive would have to be  spoken surely.  Just saying in your head "f..ken tosser, f..ken tosser"  is hardly a crime.

Those aspects whether true or false have no bearing on whether  a person is guilty or innocent IMO. 
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Brietta on December 12, 2017, 02:58:51 AM
Absolutely true, refusing to answer the simplest of questions, avoiding a reconstruction and generally being obstructive and abusive to police officers has never been seen in policing circles as being conducive with innocence.

Gerry McCann went against legal advice to remain silent and answered all the questions put to him at his arguido interview

Snip
Portuguese detectives knew there was no conclusive evidence against the McCanns three days before they interviewed them and made them suspects, official files have disclosed.
*****************************************************************************************
Officers had been told in an email from the Forensic Science Service laboratory in Birmingham that no conclusive traces of Madeleine's DNA had been found in the family's hire car.

But detectives went on to tell Mr McCann, during an eight hour interrogation, that his daughter's DNA had been found in the boot of the vehicle, which was rented more than three weeks after she vanished.

A friend of the couple said: "It was pretty clear they were seeking a confession and were prepared to do this (put forward false information) to achieve that.

"Serious questions need to be asked about why this was put to Gerry as fact. It was sloppy at best and deliberately manipulative at worst.

"A number of senior officers went down the route of making assumptions and suppositions and trying to force a confession to something that didn't happen."

This was one of the main areas of suspicion and Mr McCann was made a suspect or "arguido" into Madeleine's disappearance, along with his wife, immediately after being questioned at Portimao police station on September 7.

The couple's spokesman Clarence Mitchell said: "There was never any 100 per cent match with Madeleine's DNA.

Caution was expressed from the very start.

"Police were wrong to pursue this line so vigorously, and the Portuguese legal system has now accepted that there was no evidence to support it.

"I can confirm that the Portuguese police put it to Gerry as a fact that Madeleine's DNA had been found in both the apartment and the vehicle when it is now clear that the initial FSS report had made no such claim.

"You have to ask yourself what the police were trying to achieve by overstating evidence that they didn't have, nor could claim to have.

"One wonders, under those circumstances, what the motivation was."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/2501055/Madeleine-McCann-Portuguese-detectives-lied-to-Gerry-McCann-about-DNA-evidence.html

Kate McCann very sensibly in my opinion exercised her legal right as an arguida to remain silent.

Neither Kate nor Gerry McCann avoided returning to Portugal for a reconstruction.  They had to legally had the request been made.  Others, including an independent witness, took legal advice as a direct result of a breakdown of trust in the Portuguese police.
In my opinion their experiences of the Portuguese handling of the case justified their caution; the McCanns were presented with lies in interview ... would they have fared any better?

In my opinion the only abuse evident in those arguido interviews which were not recorded ... was very one sided and came from the interviewers desperate for 'confession' to 'solve' their case, not the interviewees desperate for their daughter.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: slartibartfast on December 12, 2017, 08:02:13 AM
Gerry McCann went against legal advice to remain silent and answered all the questions put to him at his arguido interview

Snip
Portuguese detectives knew there was no conclusive evidence against the McCanns three days before they interviewed them and made them suspects, official files have disclosed.
*****************************************************************************************
Officers had been told in an email from the Forensic Science Service laboratory in Birmingham that no conclusive traces of Madeleine's DNA had been found in the family's hire car.

But detectives went on to tell Mr McCann, during an eight hour interrogation, that his daughter's DNA had been found in the boot of the vehicle, which was rented more than three weeks after she vanished.

A friend of the couple said: "It was pretty clear they were seeking a confession and were prepared to do this (put forward false information) to achieve that.

"Serious questions need to be asked about why this was put to Gerry as fact. It was sloppy at best and deliberately manipulative at worst.

"A number of senior officers went down the route of making assumptions and suppositions and trying to force a confession to something that didn't happen."

This was one of the main areas of suspicion and Mr McCann was made a suspect or "arguido" into Madeleine's disappearance, along with his wife, immediately after being questioned at Portimao police station on September 7.

The couple's spokesman Clarence Mitchell said: "There was never any 100 per cent match with Madeleine's DNA.

Caution was expressed from the very start.

"Police were wrong to pursue this line so vigorously, and the Portuguese legal system has now accepted that there was no evidence to support it.

"I can confirm that the Portuguese police put it to Gerry as a fact that Madeleine's DNA had been found in both the apartment and the vehicle when it is now clear that the initial FSS report had made no such claim.

"You have to ask yourself what the police were trying to achieve by overstating evidence that they didn't have, nor could claim to have.

"One wonders, under those circumstances, what the motivation was."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/2501055/Madeleine-McCann-Portuguese-detectives-lied-to-Gerry-McCann-about-DNA-evidence.html

Kate McCann very sensibly in my opinion exercised her legal right as an arguida to remain silent.

Neither Kate nor Gerry McCann avoided returning to Portugal for a reconstruction.  They had to legally had the request been made.  Others, including an independent witness, took legal advice as a direct result of a breakdown of trust in the Portuguese police.
In my opinion their experiences of the Portuguese handling of the case justified their caution; the McCanns were presented with lies in interview ... would they have fared any better?

In my opinion the only abuse evident in those arguido interviews which were not recorded ... was very one sided and came from the interviewers desperate for 'confession' to 'solve' their case, not the interviewees desperate for their daughter.

Cite for Gerry going against legal advise?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: John on December 12, 2017, 01:47:57 PM
Once being made arguido it was their right to refuse to answer questions.
I don't believe the McCanns were the main players blocking a reconstruction being done.
Being abusive would have to be  spoken surely.  Just saying in your head "f..ken tosser, f..ken tosser"  is hardly a crime.

Those aspects whether true or false have no bearing on whether  a person is guilty or innocent IMO.

You mustn't have seen the police video I posted recently where an officer is very clear as to how they view "no comment" responses in abduction cases.  Frankly, I'm not in the least surprised, suspects who have absolutely nothing to hide just don't respond in that manner.  Decent, honourable, law-abiding folk generally without exception simply want to assist the police and answer the question.  Those who don't tend to have an ulterior motive for doing so imo.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Brietta on December 12, 2017, 02:07:27 PM
You mustn't have seen the police video I posted recently where an officer is very clear as to how they view "no comment" responses in abduction cases.  Frankly, I'm not in the least surprised, suspects who have absoluterly nothing to hide just don't respond in that manner.  Decent, honourable, law-abiding folk generally without exception simply want to assist the police and answer the question.  Those who don't tend to have an ulterior motive for doing so imo.

Kate McCann had already volunteered information and answered all the questions she could in the investigation into Madeleine's case.

The questions she refused to answer on legal advice were all about the case against her and nothing else. 

Therefore in my opinion her ulterior motive was to keep herself out of jail so that the investigation into Madeleine's case would be enabled to continue to conclusion.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: jassi on December 12, 2017, 02:15:43 PM
As far as I'm aware, police tend to ask  the the same questions several times over. It's part of their procedure.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: slartibartfast on December 12, 2017, 02:20:03 PM
As far as I'm aware, police tend to the the same questions several times over. It's part of their procedure.

Check for variations.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: slartibartfast on December 12, 2017, 02:21:17 PM
Kate McCann had already volunteered information and answered all the questions she could in the investigation into Madeleine's case.

The questions she refused to answer on legal advice were all about the case against her and nothing else. 

Therefore in my opinion her ulterior motive was to keep herself out of jail so that the investigation into Madeleine's case would be enabled to continue to conclusion.

Ulterior?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: John on December 12, 2017, 02:32:28 PM
Kate McCann had already volunteered information and answered all the questions she could in the investigation into Madeleine's case.

The questions she refused to answer on legal advice were all about the case against her and nothing else. 

Therefore in my opinion her ulterior motive was to keep herself out of jail so that the investigation into Madeleine's case would be enabled to continue to conclusion.

Obviously, nobody wants to see the inside of a Portuguese jail.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: John on December 12, 2017, 02:35:53 PM
Check for variations.

Exactly.  They ask the same questions a few days apart to see if there is any difference in the responses.  Kate McCanns lawyer apparently visited them the night before they were to be questioned and informed them that they were being designated arguido (official suspect).  He allegedly advised them not to answer any questions, but why?

Why was their lawyer so concerned?   Surely as the parents of a missing three-year-old, if they had already been frank and open and told the police everything they knew then they had nothing to fear?  Am I missing something here?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 12, 2017, 02:46:28 PM
Exactly.  They ask the same questions a few days apart to see if there is any difference in the responses.  Kate McCanns lawyer apparently visited them the night before they were to be questioned as arguidos and allegedly advised them not to answer any questions.  I wonder why?

Why was their lawyer so concerned?   Surely as the parents of a missing three-year-old, if they had already been frank and open and told the police everything they knew then they had nothing to fear?  Am I missing something here?

yes you are missing something ...imo. Every situation is dfferent and here I think kate was very wise not to answer the questions,....that really were of no use...imo...to further the search for her daughter.

They were simply trying to break her...imo and if she had answerred those they would have asked another 40 irrelevant question. Theonly way to stop it is to refuse to answer questions. she had alraedy answerred all questions put to he over about 19 hours in total. Remember the reason they were asking these questions is because they dAt the centre of this trial, there is a conflict between two existing rights, the right to good name and reputation of the claimants (through the presumption of innocence that they always were entitled to) and the right to freedom of expression of the defendant, in the concrete field of the right to opinion he is entitled to.
had misunderstood the evidence from the Uk and wrongly thought there was evidence to implicate kate...that puts into perspective

Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 12, 2017, 02:53:34 PM
You mustn't have seen the police video I posted recently where an officer is very clear as to how they view "no comment" responses in abduction cases.  Frankly, I'm not in the least surprised, suspects who have absolutely nothing to hide just don't respond in that manner.  Decent, honourable, law-abiding folk generally without exception simply want to assist the police and answer the question.  Those who don't tend to have an ulterior motive for doing so imo.

Each case has to be judged seperately...certainly if kate had refused to answer questions from day one that could be seen as a red flag...but that is not the case. Kate had already answerred about 19 hours of questioning
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: slartibartfast on December 12, 2017, 03:24:19 PM
Exactly.  They ask the same questions a few days apart to see if there is any difference in the responses.  Kate McCanns lawyer apparently visited them the night before they were to be questioned and informed them that they were being designated arguido (official suspect).  He allegedly advised them not to answer any questions, but why?

Why was their lawyer so concerned?   Surely as the parents of a missing three-year-old, if they had already been frank and open and told the police everything they knew then they had nothing to fear?  Am I missing something here?

If you are frank and open, you don’t weave any tangled webs.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 12, 2017, 03:28:26 PM
If you are frank and open, you don’t weave any tangled webs.
Are you not aware that innocent people are arrested....held on remand..for months ... and are sometimes convicted
To say that someone exercising their right to silence always has something to hide is ridiculously simplistic...imo
But each to his own
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: slartibartfast on December 12, 2017, 03:30:30 PM
Are you not aware that innocent people are arrested....held on remand..for months ... and are sometimes convicted
To say that someone exercising their right to silence always has something to hide is ridiculously simplistic...imo
But each to his own

What has that to do with my post?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 12, 2017, 03:37:25 PM
What has that to do with my post?
your post implies that innocent suspects ahve nothing to fear in answerring questions...that isnt true and thats why there is a right to silence imo
it is not unherad for an innocent person to exercise the right to silence
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 12, 2017, 03:38:28 PM
If you are frank and open, you don’t weave any tangled webs.

but by being frank and open an innocent person could incriminate themself
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on December 12, 2017, 03:44:52 PM
I think the best we can do is wait for more information. Just a case of waiting to see if presuming the McCann lawyers have submitted an application to the court on their behalf; then if the application will be considered.  After that it will possibly be a very long wait for resolution one way or the other.

Just a waiting game really.

You now sound like a "sceptic"; "tic toc tic toc".... 8(0(*
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on December 12, 2017, 03:57:53 PM
Exactly.  They ask the same questions a few days apart to see if there is any difference in the responses.  Kate McCanns lawyer apparently visited them the night before they were to be questioned and informed them that they were being designated arguido (official suspect).  He allegedly advised them not to answer any questions, but why?

Why was their lawyer so concerned?  Surely as the parents of a missing three-year-old, if they had already been frank and open and told the police everything they knew then they had nothing to fear?  Am I missing something here?

I can see why and it hinges around personalities.
Most people find it very hard to answer only that which has been asked of them,then zip it. Making like Perry Mason to an investigator, in the wider sense of the word investigator, sets bells off then creates an urge in the investigator to start unpicking. Those who cannot zip it are an investigators dream and frequently end up hanging themselves.
Join up the dots... 8(>((
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 12, 2017, 04:02:53 PM
I can see why and it hinges around personalities.
Most people find it very hard to answer only that which has been asked of them,then zip it. Making like Perry Mason to an investigator, in the wider sense of the word investigator, sets bells off then creates an urge in the investigator to start unpicking. Those who cannot zip it are an investigators dream and frequently end up hanging themselves.
Join up the dots... 8(>((

Precisely....I was once advised exactly that....say as little as possible...I was innocent of course
There was also the added complication that the interview was not recorded....at least this time it was verbatim....the interpreter could have written anything and Kate was required to sign it...an absolute farce Imo
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 12, 2017, 04:17:35 PM
Kate was being asked incriminating questions in a foreign language...written down in a foreign language ...that she would be asked to sign and confirm bunderstanding...no surprise she was advised not to answer
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on December 12, 2017, 04:20:33 PM
Precisely....I was once advised exactly that....say as little as possible...I was innocent of course
There was also the added complication that the interview was not recorded....at least this time it was verbatim....the interpreter could have written anything and Kate was required to sign it...an absolute farce Imo

You talk as though the audio recording of interviews is de rigeur everywhere.
Simply put it isn't; not even the UK.
The dodgy interpreter line is wearing thin too.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 12, 2017, 04:22:17 PM
You talk as though the audio recording of interviews is de rigeur everywhere.
Simply put it isn't; not even the UK.
The dodgy interpreter line is wearing thin too.

In your opinion it may be...not in mine

In the UK the statement would have been written in the suspects own language...signed and then translated
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: G-Unit on December 12, 2017, 04:40:02 PM
Each case has to be judged seperately...certainly if kate had refused to answer questions from day one that could be seen as a red flag...but that is not the case. Kate had already answerred about 19 hours of questioning

A witness can't remain silent, so Kate McCann had to answer in her first interview. Where do you get 19 hours of questioning from? I think it's much less than that.

4th May;  The interview lasted four long hours.
6th Sept;  Started 2.55 until 7.50 resumed 10.05 until 12.40. Just over 7 hours.

This total of 11 hours was taken from 'madeleine' by Kate McCann.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 12, 2017, 04:42:42 PM
A witness can't remain silent, so Kate McCann had to answer in her first interview. Where do you get 19 hours of questioning from? I think it's much less than that.

4th May;  The interview lasted four long hours.
6th Sept;  Started 2.55 until 7.50 resumed 10.05 until 12.40. Just over 7 hours.


She didn't have
This total of 11 hours was taken from 'madeleine' by Kate McCann.

She didn't have to answer...she chose to
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: barrier on December 12, 2017, 04:58:12 PM
Kate was being asked incriminating questions in a foreign language...written down in a foreign language ...that she would be asked to sign and confirm bunderstanding...no surprise she was advised not to answer

But yet Rowley and operation Grange are quite willing to accept the very same statements as being sound.So nothing untoward happened.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 12, 2017, 05:01:46 PM
But yet Rowley and operation Grange are quite willing to accept the very same statements as being sound.So nothing untoward happened.

Yes Rowley and Grange are quite happy to accept Kate refused to answer questions...they would have reinterviewed her anyway...imo
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on December 12, 2017, 05:06:37 PM
In your opinion it may be...not in mine

In the UK the statement would have been written in the suspects own language...signed and then translated

It is not my opinion it is that of the Home Office.
See Home Office Code E Section 3
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 12, 2017, 05:10:23 PM
It is not my opinion it is that of the Home Office.
See Home Office Code E Section 3

I'm referring to your claim that the translation issue is wearing a bit thin...I don't think the HO have a code for that...what they do have protocol for is the interviwing of suspects who dont speak english...as i have already said
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: barrier on December 12, 2017, 05:21:45 PM
Yes Rowley and Grange are quite happy to accept Kate refused to answer questions...they would have reinterviewed her anyway...imo

Separate argument but Rowley trumps your opinion.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: John on December 12, 2017, 05:23:58 PM
yes you are missing something ...imo. Every situation is dfferent and here I think kate was very wise not to answer the questions,....that really were of no use...imo...to further the search for her daughter.

They were simply trying to break her...imo and if she had answerred those they would have asked another 40 irrelevant question. Theonly way to stop it is to refuse to answer questions. she had alraedy answerred all questions put to he over about 19 hours in total. Remember the reason they were asking these questions is because they dAt the centre of this trial, there is a conflict between two existing rights, the right to good name and reputation of the claimants (through the presumption of innocence that they always were entitled to) and the right to freedom of expression of the defendant, in the concrete field of the right to opinion he is entitled to.
had misunderstood the evidence from the Uk and wrongly thought there was evidence to implicate kate...that puts into perspective

Why would anyone want to stop answering police questions when all they were attempting to do was to exclude her as a suspect?

Interestingly, Kate felt she could answer this question after refusing to answer the previous 48...

Q.  Are you aware that in not answering the questions you are jeopardising the investigation, which seeks to discover what happened to your daughter?

A.  'Yes, if that’s what the investigation thinks.'


NB.   Jeopardising the investigation!



Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: John on December 12, 2017, 05:28:40 PM
Are you not aware that innocent people are arrested....held on remand..for months ... and are sometimes convicted
To say that someone exercising their right to silence always has something to hide is ridiculously simplistic...imo
But each to his own

Not when the person being questioned is a relative in a potential abduction case.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 12, 2017, 05:35:17 PM
Why would anyone want to stop answering police questions when all they were attempting to do was to exclude her as a suspect?

Interestingly, Kate felt she could answer this question after refusing to answer the previous 48...

Q.  Are you aware that in not answering the questions you are jeopardising the investigation, which seeks to discover what happened to your daughter?

A.  'Yes, if that’s what the investigation thinks.'


NB.   Jeopardising the investigation!

They were not trying to exclude her...they were trying to include her and find evidence for doing so. Add to that they had misunderstood the evidence and actually thought they had evidence that showed the mccanns were involved. added to that the questions were asked by the pj in portuguese ...tranlated...answerrred by kate...translated and written down....A slight loss in translation could have mistakenly given the pj grounds for arrest...the mcCanns were worried they could be held on remand for up to a year...I see every reason not to answer and I think Gerry was wrong to answer

imo
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: G-Unit on December 12, 2017, 05:41:22 PM
She didn't have to answer...she chose to

No comment on your exaggerated figure of 19 hours of questioning I see.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 12, 2017, 05:44:01 PM
No comment on your exaggerated figure of 19 hours of questioning I see.

19 hours may well refer to the time she was at the station for questioning...even so the fact ...according to you...that she answerred questions for 12 hours showed a will to co operate...whan as i have explained she could have chosen then not to answer any questions
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 12, 2017, 05:47:45 PM
 have just noticed that kates interpreter was named ...Alice Avakoff....is that a portuguese name
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 12, 2017, 05:51:04 PM
6th Sept;  Started 2.55 until 7.50 resumed 10.05 until 12.40. Just over 7 hours.


so Kate was in the staion for 9 hours and answerred questions for 7....thats just the second day...How anyone can accuse Kate of not wanting to help the investigation when on one day alone she answerred questions for seven hours...I think thats quite unfair

anyone who is good at maths will tell you its not just over seven hours but seven and a half hours....
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on December 12, 2017, 06:30:00 PM
I'm referring to your claim that the translation issue is wearing a bit thin...I don't think the HO have a code for that...what they do have protocol for is the interviwing of suspects who dont speak english...as i have already said

It's in here:
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/590687/BAGT-Witness-statements-v4.pdf
Also some guff in here.
https://www.humberside.police.uk/sites/default/files/Witness_Statement_Taking.pdf

If you work out an activity list it's not a fat lot different from what was done in Portugal so what's your problem?
As for recording ? To be admissible in court a statement must be in writing.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: John on December 12, 2017, 06:31:21 PM
have just noticed that kates interpreter was named ...Alice Avakoff....is that a portuguese name

Its originally of Russian ancestry I believe.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: G-Unit on December 12, 2017, 06:49:09 PM
According to her book, Kate's lawyer was somewhat uneasy about the way she answered the questions put to her on 6th. He advised her during a break to be 'less definite'. Later, at the villa, he told her she was likely to be made arguida. Reading her account, Gerry isn't mentioned much, and the PJ certainly seemed more interested in her. Although her diaries were not accepted as evidence by the judge, some of the questions they asked seemed to arise from the alleged content of her diaries as reported by the Portuguese press;

Asked whether or not it is true that the twins have difficulty sleeping, that they are restless and that that causes her uneasiness, she did not respond.

Asked whether or not it is true that at certain times she felt desperate [driven to despair; angered; exasperated] by the attitude of the children and that that left her much disquiet [unease], she did not respond.

Asked whether or not it is true that in England she was thinking to deliver MADELEINE into the custody [guardianship] of a family member, she did not respond.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/KATE-MCCANN_07-09-07.htm

Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 12, 2017, 06:53:44 PM
It's in here:
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/590687/BAGT-Witness-statements-v4.pdf
Also some guff in here.
https://www.humberside.police.uk/sites/default/files/Witness_Statement_Taking.pdf

If you work out an activity list it's not a fat lot different from what was done in Portugal so what's your problem?
As for recording ? To be admissible in court a statement must be in writing.

Did you read the links you posted...from the second one...

7. FOREIGN LANGUAGE STATEMENTS
7.1 In the case of a person making a statement in a language other than English;
 7.1.1 The interpreter should take down the statement in the language in
 which it is made and the person making the statement should sign it.
7.1.2 An official English translation should be made in due course by the
 interpreter.
 7.1.3 The interpreter should then make a statement introducing both the
 original foreign language statement and the English translation as
 Police items and certifying that the translation is accurate.

That is nothing like what was done in portugal and was what I suggested earlier...you need to reconsider...imo
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Brietta on December 12, 2017, 06:54:10 PM
But yet Rowley and operation Grange are quite willing to accept the very same statements as being sound.So nothing untoward happened.

Unfortunately he didn't specify which Portuguese investigation was considered sound.  In my opinion, it would be the one which was capable of understanding the forensic results commissioned from the FCC.
The original team to which you refer, and who carried out the arguido interrogations, quite obviously did not.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 12, 2017, 06:55:53 PM
Its originally of Russian ancestry I believe.

so a russian translating an english spoken word...liverpool accent.. into portuguese....do we have any evidence of her proficiency
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: barrier on December 12, 2017, 07:07:54 PM
Unfortunately he didn't specify which Portuguese investigation was considered sound.  In my opinion, it would be the one which was capable of understanding the forensic results commissioned from the FCC.
The original team to which you refer, and who carried out the arguido interrogations, quite obviously did not.

Rowley tells us it was the original investigation.It includes all of it.


Quote
MR: Two points to that, firstly the involvement of the parents, that was dealt with at the time by the original investigation by the Portuguese. We had a look at all the material and we are happy that was all dealt with and there is no reason whatsoever to reopen that or start rumours that was a line of investigation
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Brietta on December 12, 2017, 07:15:02 PM
Rowley tells us it was the original investigation.It includes all of it.

Uh hu that would be right.  I for one refer to the Amaral investigation as a separate entity from the Rebelo investigation but in reality that is imprecise terminology: in reality, all that changed was the lead player and one other ... it remained the same investigation.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on December 12, 2017, 10:01:21 PM
Did you read the links you posted...from the second one...

7. FOREIGN LANGUAGE STATEMENTS
7.1 In the case of a person making a statement in a language other than English;
 7.1.1 The interpreter should take down the statement in the language in
 which it is made and the person making the statement should sign it.
7.1.2 An official English translation should be made in due course by the
 interpreter.
 7.1.3 The interpreter should then make a statement introducing both the
 original foreign language statement and the English translation as
 Police items and certifying that the translation is accurate.

That is nothing like what was done in portugal and was what I suggested earlier...you need to reconsider...imo

Don't ask dozey ....... questions of course I read it and my comment still stands.
Write down an activity list for each option then tell us how the end result varies significantly. If you don't have the skill sets to do activity lists I'll do it for you.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 12, 2017, 10:06:16 PM
Don't ask dozey ....... questions of course I read it and my comment still stands.
Write down an activity list for each option then tell us how the end result varies significantly. If you don't have the skill sets to do activity lists I'll do it for you.

if you have read it you should have noticed that your link recommends that the suspects statement should be taken down is his/her  own language ...signed by the suspect and then translated...unless the mushrooms on my steak were magic this evening that is nothing like what happened in portugal
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: John on December 12, 2017, 10:19:38 PM
so a russian translating an english spoken word...liverpool accent.. into portuguese....do we have any evidence of her proficiency

The name might be Russian but she could very well have been born and educated in Portugal.  Let's not jump to conclusions.

As for how statements were recorded in Portugal in 2007, there is no definitive way of knowing what actually occurred since both Portuguese and British interpreters were used.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 12, 2017, 10:22:29 PM
The name might be Russian but she could very well have been born and educated in Portugal.  Let's not jump to conclusions.

only asking questions....and I think its a reasonable question as the portuguese dont seem to use accredited translators
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: slartibartfast on December 13, 2017, 05:05:09 PM
Kate McCann had already volunteered information and answered all the questions she could in the investigation into Madeleine's case.

The questions she refused to answer on legal advice were all about the case against her and nothing else. 

Therefore in my opinion her ulterior motive was to keep herself out of jail so that the investigation into Madeleine's case would be enabled to continue to conclusion.

If her ulterior motive was to avoid jail, what motive did she publicly espouse?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Brietta on December 13, 2017, 05:41:12 PM
If her ulterior motive was to avoid jail, what motive did she publicly espouse?

You may have missed the ... "in my opinion" ... in my post  8(0(*
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: slartibartfast on December 13, 2017, 06:16:20 PM
You may have missed the ... "in my opinion" ... in my post  8(0(*

Doesn’t answer the question?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Jane Mcard on December 13, 2017, 07:45:27 PM
Its originally of Russian ancestry I believe.

In my opinion ... If she had wanted to help the enquiry to find her alleged 'missing' child then she would have answered them.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on December 13, 2017, 08:06:32 PM
if you have read it you should have noticed that your link recommends that the suspects statement should be taken down is his/her  own language ...signed by the suspect and then translated...unless the mushrooms on my steak were magic this evening that is nothing like what happened in portugal

Why are you quoting from the Humberside Police document and not the Home Office or CPS documents?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 13, 2017, 08:08:58 PM
In my opinion ... If she had wanted to help the enquiry to find her alleged 'missing' child then she would have answered them.
thats your opinion .....my opinion is she was completely right not to answer the questions

Its interesting to consider why the right to silence is enshrined in law around the world...by your logic it was brought in the help guilty poeple evade justice..that doesnt really work logically....what does work is that it is a mechanism to protect the innocent..all imo
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 13, 2017, 08:10:33 PM
Why are you quoting from the Humberside Police document and not the Home Office or CPS documents?

because its the only one that gives specific guidance on interviewing those who dont speak english...you did provide alink to it so its no surprise I quoted from the link you provided
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Carana on December 13, 2017, 08:11:36 PM
In my opinion ...  If she had wanted to help the enquiry to find her alleged 'missing' child then she would have answered them.


Which of those questions do you think would have helped the parents to find their daughter?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: G-Unit on December 13, 2017, 08:13:24 PM
have just noticed that kates interpreter was named ...Alice Avakoff....is that a portuguese name

Really? Well her interpreter was chosen by her from a list provided by the British Consulate.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 13, 2017, 08:14:07 PM
Really? Well her interpreter was chosen by her from a list provided by the British Consulate.

and what were her qualifications and who compiled the list
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: jassi on December 13, 2017, 08:14:44 PM

Which of those questions do you think would have helped the parents to find their daughter?

Who can tell where answers might have led ?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on December 13, 2017, 08:18:54 PM
because its the only one that gives specific guidance on interviewing those who dont speak english...you did provide alink to it so its no surprise I quoted from the link you provided

I provided a link to the Home Office code and as I recall said "there is more guff in here" to the Humberside Police link.
So why did you not use the home Office document which has to be considered the ruling document?
None the less I challenged you to analyse it with an activity list.............let's see it.
While you're at it you could compare what was done with the EU directive that became law three years later.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 13, 2017, 08:23:28 PM
I provided a link to the Home Office code and as I recall said said "there is more guff in here" to the Humberside Police lonk.
So why did you not use the home Office document which has to be considered the ruling document?
None the less I challenged you to analyse it with an activity list.............let's see it.
While your at it you could compare what was done with the EU directive that became law three years later.

because the HO document does not give specific guidance on interviewing an english non speaker...post the eu dirsctive and I can have a look at it.

what I do know from professional experience as to what is accepted by uk courts is that the statements as
 collected would be of little value in court.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Carana on December 13, 2017, 08:24:57 PM
Who can tell where answers might have led ?

Which hadn't she already answered that could have helped?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: G-Unit on December 13, 2017, 08:31:30 PM
and what were her qualifications and who compiled the list

I suggest you ask the British Consulate.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 13, 2017, 08:38:19 PM
I suggest you ask the British Consulate.

I doubt they would tell me and untill we know we have no knowledge of this ladies abilities
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: G-Unit on December 13, 2017, 10:07:14 PM
I doubt they would tell me and untill we know we have no knowledge of this ladies abilities

Well if she's dodgy you can't blame the PJ.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on December 13, 2017, 10:18:13 PM
because the HO document does not give specific guidance on interviewing an english non speaker...post the eu dirsctive and I can have a look at it.

what I do know 1) from professional experience as to what is accepted by uk courts is that 2) the statements as collected would be of little value in court.

1) Professional experience in the law?
2) Please do tell how you arrive at that conclusion.

Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 13, 2017, 10:28:35 PM
1) Professional experience in the law?
2) Please do tell how you arrive at that conclusion.

I would have to divulge too much

What I can say I often have to gain consent from people........to a standard that I could show in court if necessary that the person had understood what I have said......a piece of paper signed by the person in a language they did not understand would not be acceptable by the court...even if they had signed it
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: pathfinder73 on December 13, 2017, 10:39:17 PM
Which hadn't she already answered that could have helped?

It doesn't matter now. When the going got tough she refused to cooperate with the police. I predict interesting times ahead.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Carana on December 13, 2017, 10:57:19 PM
It doesn't matter now. When the going got tough she refused to cooperate with the police. I predict interesting times ahead.

She wad advised not to answer as an arguida.

And which questions hadn't she answered before that could have helped find her?

Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Robittybob1 on December 14, 2017, 12:12:50 AM
It doesn't matter now. When the going got tough she refused to cooperate with the police. I predict interesting times ahead.
Well I do hope that prediction comes true.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: John on December 14, 2017, 01:32:20 AM
thats your opinion .....my opinion is she was completely right not to answer the questions

Its interesting to consider why the right to silence is enshrined in law around the world...by your logic it was brought in the help guilty poeple evade justice..that doesnt really work logically....what does work is that it is a mechanism to protect the innocent..all imo

Gerry was also advised to remain silent but he chose to do the right thing and answer every question to the best of his ability as far as we know.  Kate on the other hand chose to remain silent which since it was her child who had gone missing was a rather puzzling thing to do. Suspects generally choose to remain silent when they have something to hide or their story just doesn't quite add up.  So what was it?

How on earth did she think she was assisiting the investigation into her daughter's disappearance by taking the coward's way out?  She should have answered every question and then asked some of her own.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 14, 2017, 07:44:49 AM
Gerry was also advised to remain silent but he chose to do the right thing and answer every question to the best of his ability as far as we know.  Kate on the other hand chose to remain silent which since it was her child who had gone missing was a rather puzzling thing to do. Suspects generally choose to remain silent when they have something to hide or their story just doesn't quite add up.  So what was it?

How on earth did she think she was assisiting the investigation into her daughter's disappearance by taking the coward's way out?  She should have answered every question and then asked some of her own.

I disagree completely, Kate ddi the right thing in following her lawyers advice. The only reason she was being asked the questions is because the PJ completely misunderstood the forensic evidence and beleived kate was covering up Maddiesndeath...imo. We know thats true because amaral still beleives it. innocent people sometimes do take the right to silence ..that is a fact
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: G-Unit on December 14, 2017, 08:19:33 AM
Some interesting comments by UK Police Officers;
http://www.ukpoliceonline.co.uk/index.php?/topic/42363-the-no-comment-statment/

Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 14, 2017, 08:21:25 AM
I think if Kate had answerred no questions from day one then that would have been suspicious...she fully cooperated until she realised that the PJ were mistaken and were convinced she  was involved...imo.....for that reason I find her silence quite reasonable
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: stephen25000 on December 14, 2017, 08:22:57 AM
I think if Kate had answerred no questions from day one then that would have been suspicious...she fully cooperated until she realised that the PJ were mistaken and were convinced she  was involved...imo.....for that reason I find her silence quite reasonable

So when was this full cooperation with the PJ ?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 14, 2017, 08:24:39 AM
Some interesting comments by UK Police Officers;
http://www.ukpoliceonline.co.uk/index.php?/topic/42363-the-no-comment-statment/

yes  " theyre all Guilty" great comment...well colin stagg wasnt

As i have said these comments are pointed at those who dont answer questions at all...which is not the case here
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: stephen25000 on December 14, 2017, 08:25:33 AM
yes  " theyre all Guilty" great comment...well colin stagg wasnt

As i have said these comments are pointed at those who dont answer questions at all...which is not the case here

Picking one comment is hardly original.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 14, 2017, 08:25:46 AM
So when was this full cooperation with the PJ ?

in the early stages....until IMO the pj made the decision that the mcCanns were guitly and maddie was dead
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Benice on December 14, 2017, 09:28:02 AM
Gerry was also advised to remain silent but he chose to do the right thing and answer every question to the best of his ability as far as we know.  Kate on the other hand chose to remain silent which since it was her child who had gone missing was a rather puzzling thing to do. Suspects generally choose to remain silent when they have something to hide or their story just doesn't quite add up.  So what was it?

How on earth did she think she was assisiting the investigation into her daughter's disappearance by taking the coward's way out?  She should have answered every question and then asked some of her own.

AFAIK The option to remain silent is part of every civilised society's judicial system.      The idea that it was introduced so that cowards could do the wrong thing is preposterous imo.

IMO Having read the questions - a blind man on a galloping horse can see that the motive behind them was not to find Madeleine - it was to find a reason to pin the crime on Kate.   

IMO We know why she didn't answer the questions.   IMO It was because her Lawyer advised her not to - and not because she couldn't answer them.     Obviously as a Portuguese lawyer he knew far more about what could happen to her if she did answer the questions than anyone else did - so why would she ignore his advice?   That would be a really stupid thing to do imo.

When we know the sort of stuff that was considered to be vital evidence by the PJ - like the DREAM for instance, or wearing a black top etc etc -  it was quite proper IMO for her lawyer to protect her from falling victim to that kind of mindset imo.

IMO Kate knew she wasn't guilty and so to expect her to do anything at all to help the PJ to pin the crime on herself is totally crackers IMO.   But that is exactly what is being suggested IMO.

AIMHO

Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: slartibartfast on December 14, 2017, 10:03:49 AM
Quick Moderator comment, all posters need to check their posts carefully for opinions. Some posters are posting “facts” that are merely beliefs.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: kizzy on December 14, 2017, 10:47:35 AM
I think if Kate had answerred no questions from day one then that would have been suspicious...she fully cooperated until she realised that the PJ were mistaken and were convinced she  was involved...imo.....for that reason I find her silence quite reasonable


All the more reason, she should have wanted it clearing up if she wasn't involved. IMO
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Lace on December 14, 2017, 11:02:07 AM
I believe the reason she didn't answer them was because they had made it obvious they were going to charge her,   they had already interrogated her quote -

Neves stated bluntly that he didn't believe my version of events.  It 'didn't fit' with what they knew.  Didn't fit? what did they know?  I was sobbing now.Unquote

Quote -  They proposed that when I put Madeleine to bed that night,  it wasn't actually the last time I'd seen her.  But it was It was! I felt I was being bullied,  and I suppose I was.  I assume these tactics were deliberate: knock her off balance by telling her that her daughter is dead and get her to confess.  Because I was in no doubt now that they were trying to make me say I'd killed Madeleine or knew what had happened to her.  I might be naive but I'm not stupid. Unquote

Quote -  On and on it went.   They tried to convince me I'd had a blackout - a loss of memory episode,  I think they called it. Unquote

IMO they were trying to get Kate to admit to something she hadn't done,  they they presented the 100% DNA of Madeleine [which wasn't true]

Can anyone honestly say,  if you had been in Kate's position they wouldn't have taken the advice of her lawyer?  Seriously?

Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Lace on December 14, 2017, 11:32:59 AM
People say 'she should have answered the questions'   are sitting in their homes all nice and safe.

They can't imagine being a woman in a foreign country whose child was missing,  interrogated for hours and being bullied into making a confession.   It's all very well to say what she should have done,  but would they if they had been in Kate's position?   I think not.

The 'evidence'  the police had for not beleiving their story was DNA of Madeleine's [which wasn't true] and the dog alerts.

Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: faithlilly on December 14, 2017, 11:58:59 AM
Some interesting comments by UK Police Officers;
http://www.ukpoliceonline.co.uk/index.php?/topic/42363-the-no-comment-statment/

While discussing Kate not answering the questions put to her I'm always put in mind of Poppi Worthington's father's behaviour when in the witness box at her inquest.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/11/29/poppi-worthingtons-father-smuggled-court-police-escort-give/

This was especially interesting 'A litany of police failings mean that there is “insufficient evidence” to charge him with any offence.' Does any supporter actually think Paul Worthington is innocent ? 

Could supporters please tell us again how incompetent the original police investigation was and can they appreciate how that 'incompetency' may have played in the McCanns favour rather than against them ?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 14, 2017, 12:12:28 PM
While discussing Kate not answering the questions put to her I'm always put in mind of Poppi Worthington's father's behaviour when in the witness box at her inquest.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/11/29/poppi-worthingtons-father-smuggled-court-police-escort-give/

This was especially interesting 'A litany of police failings mean that there is “insufficient evidence” to charge him with any offence.' Does any supporter actually think Paul Worthington is innocent ? 

Could supporters please tell us again how incompetent the original police investigation was and can they appreciate how that 'incompetency' may have played in the McCanns favour rather than against them ?

I always think of Colin stagg .....they even managed to charge him and take him to trial....an innocent man who didn't answer questions
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: kizzy on December 14, 2017, 12:13:43 PM
People say 'she should have answered the questions'   are sitting in their homes all nice and safe.

They can't imagine being a woman in a foreign country whose child was missing,  interrogated for hours and being bullied into making a confession.   It's all very well to say what she should have done,  but would they if they had been in Kate's position?   I think not.

The 'evidence'  the police had for not beleiving their story was DNA of Madeleine's [which wasn't true] and the dog alerts.


Why shouldn't we be sat here safe,we have done nothing wrong.

Its a pity maddie isn't sat at home safe, she did nothing wrong,but was let down.

That is why the mccanns are where they are today.

Do you not expect them, to get the contempt they get.

The abduction has not been proved. fgs

all imo...anything else is iyo
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Lace on December 14, 2017, 12:25:29 PM

Why shouldn't we be sat here safe,we have done nothing wrong.

Its a pity maddie isn't sat at home safe, she did nothing wrong,but was let down.

That is why the mccanns are where they are today.

Do you not expect them, to get the contempt they get.

The abduction has not been proved. fgs

all imo...anything else is iyo

Did I say you had done anything wrong?  I am saying it's all very well people who have not been in the situation Kate was in to say she should have answered the questions.   Put yourself in her place.

Yes Madeleine was let down,   and the McCann's know that,  Kate herself said 'we've let her down'.  Madeleine should be sitting safe in her home and it's something no doubt the McCann's wish for every day.   Have contempt for them if you wish,  but don't try and make out that you know Kate should have answered the questions given to her when she was clearly being bullied into making a confession IMO

The fact is abduction has not been ruled out either.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Lace on December 14, 2017, 12:28:11 PM
While discussing Kate not answering the questions put to her I'm always put in mind of Poppi Worthington's father's behaviour when in the witness box at her inquest.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/11/29/poppi-worthingtons-father-smuggled-court-police-escort-give/

This was especially interesting 'A litany of police failings mean that there is “insufficient evidence” to charge him with any offence.' Does any supporter actually think Paul Worthington is innocent ? 

Could supporters please tell us again how incompetent the original police investigation was and can they appreciate how that 'incompetency' may have played in the McCanns favour rather than against them ?

Can I say that Poppi Worthingtons father had fact stacked up before him,   proof that he had done something,  the McCann's didn't.

Are the police giving untrue facts to the father to get him to confess?   NO.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: slartibartfast on December 14, 2017, 12:28:56 PM
People say 'she should have answered the questions'   are sitting in their homes all nice and safe.

They can't imagine being a woman in a foreign country whose child was missing,  interrogated for hours and being bullied into making a confession.   It's all very well to say what she should have done,  but would they if they had been in Kate's position?   I think not.

The 'evidence'  the police had for not beleiving their story was DNA of Madeleine's [which wasn't true] and the dog alerts.

Not wasn't true, wasn't proved.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Lace on December 14, 2017, 12:31:00 PM
While discussing Kate not answering the questions put to her I'm always put in mind of Poppi Worthington's father's behaviour when in the witness box at her inquest.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/11/29/poppi-worthingtons-father-smuggled-court-police-escort-give/

This was especially interesting 'A litany of police failings mean that there is “insufficient evidence” to charge him with any offence.' Does any supporter actually think Paul Worthington is innocent ? 

Could supporters please tell us again how incompetent the original police investigation was and can they appreciate how that 'incompetency' may have played in the McCanns favour rather than against them ?

I can't see where 'incompetency' played in the McCann's favour,  only that police were more intent on blaming the parents then searching for Madeleine.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: stephen25000 on December 14, 2017, 12:33:03 PM
I can't see where 'incompetency' played in the McCann's favour,  only that police were more intent on blaming the parents then searching for Madeleine.

Can we please stop the myth that Madeleine wasn't searched for.

She was.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: faithlilly on December 14, 2017, 12:35:11 PM
I always think of Colin stagg .....they even managed to charge him and take him to trial....an innocent man who didn't answer questions

Colin Stagg answered all the questions put to him.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: kizzy on December 14, 2017, 12:36:19 PM
Did I say you had done anything wrong?  I am saying it's all very well people who have not been in the situation Kate was in to say she should have answered the questions.   Put yourself in her place.

Yes Madeleine was let down,   and the McCann's know that,  Kate herself said 'we've let her down'.  Madeleine should be sitting safe in her home and it's something no doubt the McCann's wish for every day.   Have contempt for them if you wish,  but don't try and make out that you know Kate should have answered the questions given to her when she was clearly being bullied into making a confession IMO

The fact is abduction has not been ruled out either.

Well I'm sat at home, thinking she should have answered the questions. [so u did mean me]

They told her she could harm the investigation, IMO she could only harm herself.

Yet they jumped on everyone, with the excuse they were harming the investigation.imo

You have only to look at G.A.

Yet k mccann did the same thing....imo

One answer questions one not ...no contradictions then. IMO
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 14, 2017, 12:38:33 PM
Colin Stagg answered all the questions put to him.

As far as I am aware he didn't
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Erngath on December 14, 2017, 12:43:49 PM
Can we please stop the myth that Madeleine wasn't searched for.

She was.




In your opinion it is a myth.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Lace on December 14, 2017, 12:44:11 PM
Well I'm sat at home, thinking she should have answered the questions. [so u did mean me]

They told her she could harm the investigation, IMO she could only harm herself.

Yet they jumped on everyone, with the excuse they were harming the investigation.imo

You have only to look at G.A.

Yet k mccann did the same thing....imo

One answer questions one not ...no contradictions then. IMO

IMO they were trying to frame her.   If they had arrested her then the case would have been closed,  the McCann's said 'then no one would be searching for Madeleine'   they wouldn't be because as far as the Portuguese would have been concerned,  the case would be closed Kate was guilty.

IMO Kate realised they weren't searching for Madeleine as soon as they started to try and pin the blame on her,  going to prison would have damaged the investigation as far as she was concerned,  so she took the advice of her lawyer.

Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: faithlilly on December 14, 2017, 12:45:21 PM
I can't see where 'incompetency' played in the McCann's favour,  only that police were more intent on blaming the parents then searching for Madeleine.

If the investigation was as incompetent as supporters would have us believe then it could very well have played in the McCanns favour. Incomplete or tainted forensics and mismanaged questioning could have let the McCanns, as well as A Nother perpetrator, of off the hook.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: John on December 14, 2017, 12:46:24 PM
I can't believe that,   they had plenty of time to get their stories the same,  if indeed they had to.  They had given their statements,  and answered those questions in doing so.

I believe the reason she didn't answer them was because they had made it obvious they were going to charge her,   they had already interrogated her quote -

Neves stated bluntly that he didn't believe my version of events.  It 'didn't fit' with what they knew.  Didn't fit? what did they know?  I was sobbing now.Unquote

Quote -  They proposed that when I put Madeleine to bed that night,  it wasn't actually the last time I'd seen her.  But it was It was! I felt I was being bullied,  and I suppose I was.  I assume these tactics were deliberate: knock her off balance by telling her that her daughter is dead and get her to confess.  Because I was in no doubt now that they were trying to make me say I'd killed Madeleine or knew what had happened to her.  I might be naive but I'm not stupid. Unquote

Quote -  On and on it went.   They tried to convince me I'd had a blackout - a loss of memory episode,  I think they called it. Unquote

IMO they were trying to get Kate to admit to something she hadn't done,  they they presented the 100% DNA of Madeleine [which wasn't true]

Can anyone honestly say,  if you had been in Kate's position they wouldn't have taken the advice of her lawyer?  Seriously?

In my experience people only require a lawyer when they perceive themselves to be in serious difficulties.  Why did the McCanns even need a lawyer in the first place if they were victims in all of this?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: faithlilly on December 14, 2017, 12:46:41 PM
As far as I am aware he didn't

Then you are wrong. Colin Stagg answered all the questions asked of him.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: stephen25000 on December 14, 2017, 12:47:25 PM



In your opinion it is a myth.

It is a recorded fact she was searched for, by the police, holidaymakers, local residents etc.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Lace on December 14, 2017, 12:48:16 PM
If the investigation was as incompetent as supporters would have us believe then it could very well have played in the McCanns favour. Incomplete or tainted forensics and mismanaged questioning could have let the McCanns, as well as A Nother perpetrator, of off the hook.

'Tainted forensics'  ?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 14, 2017, 12:48:32 PM
Then you are wrong. Colin Stagg answered all the questions asked of him.

Do you have a cite.... otherwise it's just opinion
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: John on December 14, 2017, 12:48:59 PM
Can we please stop the myth that Madeleine wasn't searched for.

She was.

I think Lace means after it was more or less established that she wasn't going to be found alive.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: stephen25000 on December 14, 2017, 12:51:50 PM
Can you give proof that the McCann's didn't search for Madeleine please?  as there are witnesses who saw Gerry searching.

The last recorded 'search' was in the early morning after her disappearance.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Lace on December 14, 2017, 01:09:41 PM
The last recorded 'search' was in the early morning after her disappearance.

Of course it was,  after that the police took over,  the McCann's were giving statements etc.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Lace on December 14, 2017, 01:11:42 PM
Not wasn't true, wasn't proved.

It wasn't 100% DNA of Madeleine which is what they were told was it?

Actually it wasn't proved but that didn't stop Amaral stating it as fact in his book.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Lace on December 14, 2017, 01:17:19 PM
In my experience people only require a lawyer when they perceive themselves to be in serious difficulties.  Why did the McCanns even need a lawyer in the first place if they were victims in all of this?

This is a quote where Kate talks about getting a lawyer,  it's after the dogs went in -

By this time,  we felt as if we had been completely cut adrift.  The police ignored us, we were up against a convoluted system neither of us really understood and the media juggernaut was now well and truly out of control.  If we were going to have any chance of protecting ourselves,  we needed somebody familiar with the system, a Portuguese lawyer, to represent our interests.  Later that day,  Gerry contacted Carlos Pinto de Abreu, a human-rights lawyer in Lisbon,  who'd been recommended to us, and arranged for us to go and see him the following afternoon. Unquote
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: kizzy on December 14, 2017, 01:18:07 PM
IMO they were trying to frame her.   If they had arrested her then the case would have been closed,  the McCann's said 'then no one would be searching for Madeleine'   they wouldn't be because as far as the Portuguese would have been concerned,  the case would be closed Kate was guilty.

IMO Kate realised they weren't searching for Madeleine as soon as they started to try and pin the blame on her,  going to prison would have damaged the investigation as far as she was concerned,  so she took the advice of her lawyer.

Come onnnn, they had too many lawyers top lawyers for that to happen.  imo
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: jassi on December 14, 2017, 01:19:50 PM
Come onnnn, they had too many lawyers top lawyers for that to happen.  imo

And a lot of media attention as well
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 14, 2017, 01:21:56 PM
Come onnnn, they had too many lawyers top lawyers for that to happen.  imo

There was  a real possibility of the McCanns being arrested...imo
If arrested they would probably not have got bail....imo
Suspects can be held for as long as a year on remand
The McCanns were innocent but in big trouble imo
That's why they needed the lawyers
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Lace on December 14, 2017, 01:24:51 PM
Come onnnn, they had too many lawyers top lawyers for that to happen.  imo

No they didn't,  see my reply to John,  that is the first time they talk about a lawyer.IMO   I'll like to see your cites saying differently.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Eleanor on December 14, 2017, 01:26:30 PM
Please let us watch out for Opinion as Fact.  I don't know how to do The Blue Stuff, and I don't have the time or patience.

Poster MUST do this themselves.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: slartibartfast on December 14, 2017, 01:38:22 PM
If her ulterior motive was to avoid jail, what motive did she publicly espouse?

Seems a difficult question?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Brietta on December 14, 2017, 02:23:28 PM
This is a quote where Kate talks about getting a lawyer,  it's after the dogs went in -

By this time,  we felt as if we had been completely cut adrift.  The police ignored us, we were up against a convoluted system neither of us really understood and the media juggernaut was now well and truly out of control.  If we were going to have any chance of protecting ourselves,  we needed somebody familiar with the system, a Portuguese lawyer, to represent our interests.  Later that day,  Gerry contacted Carlos Pinto de Abreu, a human-rights lawyer in Lisbon,  who'd been recommended to us, and arranged for us to go and see him the following afternoon. Unquote

Thanks for that Lace.

Their child had gone missing in a foreign country and they were subject to a legal system they did not understand; why there would be any objection to them seeking professional legal advice from a lawyer is a bit of a mystery for me.

Having understood the necessity of employing a lawyer who understood what Kate described as " a convoluted legal system" failing to listen to his legal advice as Gerry did was not the sensible course of action.

Kate behaved appropriately and more importantly, legally and accepted his advice to remain silent;  I fail to see why exercising one's legal rights should be considered a cause for censure.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: barrier on December 14, 2017, 02:43:57 PM
Does any one know what right is given under police interview in Portugal.We know in Engalnd and Wales its states.

Quote
"You do not have to say anything. But it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence."

This was amended in 1994 from
Quote
"You do not have to say anything but anything you do say will be taken down and may be given in evidence.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Brietta on December 14, 2017, 02:54:19 PM
Does any one know what right is given under police interview in Portugal.We know in Engalnd and Wales its states.

This was amended in 1994 from

Being interviewed as a witness entails answering truthfully all questions asked.  If self incriminating questions are to be asked the person is given arguido status which entitles them to have a lawyer present and entitles them to the right to remain silent.
Witnesses can request arguido status which will entitle them to those rights.

That is my understanding ... any one able to add or suggest where I have gone wrong.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: slartibartfast on December 14, 2017, 03:05:06 PM
Being interviewed as a witness entails answering truthfully all questions asked.  If self incriminating questions are to be asked the person is given arguido status which entitles them to have a lawyer present and entitles them to the right to remain silent.
Witnesses can request arguido status which will entitle them to those rights.

That is my understanding ... any one able to add or suggest where I have gone wrong.

IMO explains why they were made Arguidos.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: barrier on December 14, 2017, 03:08:04 PM
Being interviewed as a witness entails answering truthfully all questions asked.  If self incriminating questions are to be asked the person is given arguido status which entitles them to have a lawyer present and entitles them to the right to remain silent.
Witnesses can request arguido status which will entitle them to those rights.

That is my understanding ... any one able to add or suggest where I have gone wrong.

Is it an implied right then? where a lawyer advises rather than a policeman reads them that right.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Brietta on December 14, 2017, 03:15:17 PM
Is it an implied right then? where a lawyer advises rather than a policeman reads them that right.

Sorry Barrier ... I'm not understanding your question.

It is a different system in Portugal ... but in my opinion the right of silence in any European country is just that ... a right ... with nothing implicit about it.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: barrier on December 14, 2017, 03:38:34 PM
Sorry Barrier ... I'm not understanding your question.

It is a different system in Portugal ... but in my opinion the right of silence in any European country is just that ... a right ... with nothing implicit about it.

Some one in for questioning in the uk under caution must be read these rights by a policeman,what of Portugal?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: faithlilly on December 14, 2017, 04:55:18 PM
Do you have a cite.... otherwise it's just opinion

I think it's up to you to provide a cite as it was you who first made the claim that he didn't answer police questions.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 14, 2017, 05:03:35 PM
I think it's up to you to provide a cite as it was you who first made the claim that he didn't answer police questions.

I've looked and at the moment can't find one....as you haven't provided a cite then it's just opinion by you too
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Brietta on December 14, 2017, 05:33:56 PM
Some one in for questioning in the uk under caution must be read these rights by a policeman,what of Portugal?

Whether or not a form of words is used to inform individuals of their rights when they are constituted arguidos, I have no idea.
I would imagine it would be necessary. 
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Carana on December 14, 2017, 06:19:42 PM
Whether or not a form of words is used to inform individuals of their rights when they are constituted arguidos, I have no idea.
I would imagine it would be necessary.

I presume so as well. However, in the McCanns' arguido police statements, for some reason "arguido" was translated as "being held as defendant".
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GERRY-MCCANN-ARGUIDO.htm
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P10/10VOLUME_Xa_Page_2553.jpg

Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on December 14, 2017, 07:19:08 PM
because its the only one that gives specific guidance on interviewing those who dont speak english...you did provide alink to it so its no surprise I quoted from the link you provided

The Home Office Document says an interpreter must be used then remains silent on how.
The clear implication being the mere act of providing/utilising an interpreter denotes compliance.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on December 14, 2017, 07:30:10 PM
I would have to divulge too much

What I can say I often have to gain consent from people........to a standard that I could show in court if necessary that the person had understood what I have said......a piece of paper signed by the person in a language they did not understand would not be acceptable by the court...even if they had signed it

That's where the use of an interpreter comes in.
To be admissible in court a witness statement must be in writing and must be signed by the witness.
Extending the argument you put forward would mean the taking witness statements from any foreign national would be a waste of time. One wonders why the EU came up with a directive covering such eventualities and why the CPS issued guidelines for England and Wales.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Brietta on December 14, 2017, 07:37:23 PM
I presume so as well. However, in the McCanns' arguido police statements, for some reason "arguido" was translated as "being held as defendant".
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GERRY-MCCANN-ARGUIDO.htm
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P10/10VOLUME_Xa_Page_2553.jpg

I think your post answers Barrier's question.  The PJ weren't about to lose them through a technicality ... pity they didn't expend the same diligence on the quality of the evidence they were relying on.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on December 14, 2017, 07:41:41 PM
Being interviewed as a witness entails answering truthfully all questions asked.  If self incriminating questions are to be asked the person is given arguido status which entitles them to have a lawyer present and entitles them to the right to remain silent.
Witnesses can request arguido status which will entitle them to those rights.

That is my understanding ... any one able to add or suggest where I have gone wrong.

You missed the curious bit which we have discussed before:
An arguido may lie without fear of redress whereas a witness may be punished by the courts for lying if caught out.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Brietta on December 14, 2017, 08:20:18 PM
You missed the curious bit which we have discussed before:
An arguido may lie without fear of redress whereas a witness may be punished by the courts for lying if caught out.

Actually I did remember and gave it a thought, Alice.  But I decided it was just too ridiculous a notion to mention without having a cite for it to hand.
Glad you confirm that my old memory cells are still working fine ... unless you and I are sharing the same delusion and both our brains have had it.

I find it a ridiculous concept though ... not our brains being past it, though they well may be ... but interviewees are allowed to lie under circumstances which I would compare with being under oath.  Very strange.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 14, 2017, 08:33:25 PM
You missed the curious bit which we have discussed before:
An arguido may lie without fear of redress whereas a witness may be punished by the courts for lying if caught out.

Do you have a cite for this.....as it stands it means an arguido is free to pervert the course of justice
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Robittybob1 on December 14, 2017, 09:04:21 PM
You missed the curious bit which we have discussed before:
An arguido may lie without fear of redress whereas a witness may be punished by the courts for lying if caught out.
Well does that mean the McCanns were allowed to lie by Portuguese law?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: stephen25000 on December 14, 2017, 09:14:06 PM
Well does that mean the the McCanns were allowed to lie by Portuguese law?

Tell me Rob, do you think all witnesses or in this case arguida, under oath or otherwise, always tell the truth ?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Brietta on December 14, 2017, 09:32:40 PM
Tell me Rob, do you think all witnesses or in this case arguida, under oath or otherwise, always tell the truth ?


With reference to the thread title ... as an arguida ... it was an impossibility for Kate McCann to be accused of telling a lie ... was it not?

Which reinforces the correctness of her lawyer's advice and the astuteness of her decision to take it ... and that is a fact!
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: stephen25000 on December 14, 2017, 09:36:39 PM

With reference to the thread title ... as an arguida ... it was an impossibility for Kate McCann to be accused of telling a lie ... was it not?

Which reinforces the correctness of her lawyer's advice and the astuteness of her decision to take it ... and that is a fact!

So you believe Brietta that all witnesses and sworn statements, are always truthful.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on December 14, 2017, 09:56:08 PM
Well does that mean the the McCanns were allowed to lie by Portuguese law?

Work it out for yourself:
"If a person becomes an arguido, they automatically gain certain rights that a witness or suspect would not have. An arguido has the right to be accompanied by a lawyer when questioned. The investigating police may ask the arguido more direct accusatory questions (the answers to which would not be admissible in court if possibly self-incriminatory and asked of a non-arguido) but the arguido must be presented with whatever evidence is held against them,and unlike a witness has the right to remain silent, not to answer any question that may incriminate the person, and does not face legal action for lying".
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 14, 2017, 09:59:32 PM
Work it out for yourself:
"If a person becomes an arguido, they automatically gain certain rights that a witness or suspect would not have. An arguido has the right to be accompanied by a lawyer when questioned. The investigating police may ask the arguido more direct accusatory questions (the answers to which would not be admissible in court if possibly self-incriminatory and asked of a non-arguido) but the arguido must be presented with whatever evidence is held against them,and unlike a witness has the right to remain silent, not to answer any question that may incriminate the person, and does not face legal action for lying".
So it would be ok to lie and pervert the course of justice
Where's the original portuguese
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Brietta on December 14, 2017, 10:02:24 PM
So you believe Brietta that all witnesses and sworn statements, are always truthful.

I believe that Kate McCann was perfectly correct to decline to answer the questions put to her as an arguida ... I also think it is inappropriate to post an oblique remark which might be taken to imply dishonesty.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: stephen25000 on December 14, 2017, 10:05:21 PM
I believe that Kate McCann was perfectly correct to decline to answer the questions put to her as an arguida ... I also think it is inappropriate to post an oblique remark which might be taken to imply dishonesty.

You can interpret as you will.

Do you seriously believe when the police interview people, they take witness statements as gospel ?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on December 14, 2017, 10:07:01 PM
So it would be ok to lie and pervert the course of justice
Where's the original portuguese

Like I said to Robbitybob: "work it out for yourself"
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 14, 2017, 10:10:33 PM
Like I said to Robbitybob: "work it out for yourself"
. I have...I think there must be more to it
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Brietta on December 14, 2017, 10:14:51 PM
You can interpret as you will.

Do you seriously believe when the police interview people, they take witness statements as gospel ?

The topic is Kate McCann and the questions put to her as an arguida ... in my opinion it is therefore best not to sidetrack to generalisations which could be taken as being pejorative as well as innuendo.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: stephen25000 on December 14, 2017, 10:20:08 PM
The topic is Kate McCann and the questions put to her as an arguida ... in my opinion it is therefore best not to sidetrack to generalisations which could be taken as being pejorative as well as innuendo.

Don''t worry Brietta.

It can still be discussed, if not on here.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 14, 2017, 10:22:39 PM
Don''t worry Brietta.

It can still be discussed, if not on here.

Wherever it is discussed it has no consequence...we can all discuss things in small groups...it's of no importance
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on December 14, 2017, 10:31:22 PM
. I have...I think there must be more to it

I am sure you do.
Maybe there is more maybe there isn't.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 14, 2017, 10:33:33 PM
I am sure you do.
Maybe there is more maybe there isn't.

So where does the claim re lies come from...any real reliable source
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Brietta on December 14, 2017, 11:03:41 PM
Don''t worry Brietta.

It can still be discussed, if not on here.

I can't dictate what can and what cannot be discussed as long as the discussion is within forum protocols which includes discussion taking place on an appropriate thread.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on December 14, 2017, 11:11:10 PM
So where does the claim re lies come from...any real reliable source

Yes
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 14, 2017, 11:14:29 PM
Yes

Then cite
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Robittybob1 on December 14, 2017, 11:20:11 PM
Tell me Rob, do you think all witnesses or in this case arguida, under oath or otherwise, always tell the truth ?
Humans nature tells us some may be lying.  Determining who is lying would be difficult as some could just be put down to bad recall or misunderstanding, or inattention.  In fact there might be many more reasons that could counter an accusation of deliberate lying.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: G-Unit on December 15, 2017, 08:09:00 AM
Well does that mean the McCanns were allowed to lie by Portuguese law?

I would think that anything said when interviewed as an arguida can be used against you in court, as in Britain. It wouldn't help your case either if you later changed what you had said as an arguida.

Seems Kate's lawyer thought the PJ had a good case. He also expressed some concerns about some of her answers to questions on 6th. Hence his advice was either confess or say nothing.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 15, 2017, 08:19:56 AM
I would think that anything said when interviewed as an arguida can be used against you in court, as in Britain. It wouldn't help your case either if you later changed what you had said as an arguida.

Seems Kate's lawyer thought the PJ had a good case. He also expressed some concerns about some of her answers to questions on 6th. Hence his advice was either confess or say nothing.

the pj did not have any case imo....the pj were looling for a confession..if thats not self incriminatory I dont know what is. The whole point of arguido status is the pj can ask incriminating questions...that has to be a fact.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: G-Unit on December 15, 2017, 09:30:53 AM
I would think that anything said when interviewed as an arguida can be used against you in court, as in Britain. It wouldn't help your case either if you later changed what you had said as an arguida.

Seems Kate's lawyer thought the PJ had a good case. He also expressed some concerns about some of her answers to questions on 6th. Hence his advice was either confess or say nothing.

Apologies, here are my cites;

'madeleine' pdf doc.

Page 251

Carlos Pinto de Abreu and his assistant, Sofia,
were waiting for me inside. Carlos told me he’d
already had a long discussion with Luís Neves. It
wasn’t looking good, he said. (1)

Page 252
Carlos came over and told me
not to be so definite in some of my answers. (2)

Page 254
Carlos still looked very concerned. There was a
great deal we needed to discuss, he told us. He
reiterated that the situation was not good. The PJ
had a lot of ‘evidence’ against us, and I was certain
to be made an arguida in the morning. (1)

Page 257
What
would you do, Carlos? If one of your daughters was
missing, and this happened to you, what would you
do? Would you confess to a crime you hadn’t
committed, knowing full well it would mean everyone
would stop searching for her?’
‘I’d consider it, yes.’ (3)

Page 262
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. (3)
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 15, 2017, 09:57:50 AM
Humans nature tells us some may be lying.  Determining who is lying would be difficult as some could just be put down to bad recall or misunderstanding, or inattention.  In fact there might be many more reasons that could counter an accusation of deliberate lying.

I don't think the pj had a case ...in fact they didn't because we have seen all the evidence
If they had wanted information to help the investigation they could have interviewed Kate as a witness
The fact they made her an arguido meant that they considered she might incriminate herself....in these circumstances more than enough reason to refuse to answer questions..imo
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: stephen25000 on December 15, 2017, 10:01:16 AM
I don't think the pj had a case ...in fact they didn't because we have seen all the evidence
If they had wanted information to help the investigation they could have interviewed Kate as a witness
The fact they made her an arguido meant that they considered she might incriminate herself....in these circumstances more than enough reason to refuse to answer questions..imo

They couldn't find evidence of abduction.


So the mccanns, as would be the case in the UK would be investigated.

Meanwhile, over 10 years later, and still nothing to show any third party in the apartment.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: barrier on December 15, 2017, 10:15:34 AM
I don't think the pj had a case ...in fact they didn't because we have seen all the evidence
If they had wanted information to help the investigation they could have interviewed Kate as a witness
The fact they made her an arguido meant that they considered she might incriminate herself....in these circumstances more than enough reason to refuse to answer questions..imo

I thought there was room for error in the translations and the files are incomplete are they not?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: G-Unit on December 15, 2017, 10:35:03 AM
I don't think the pj had a case ...in fact they didn't because we have seen all the evidence
If they had wanted information to help the investigation they could have interviewed Kate as a witness
The fact they made her an arguido meant that they considered she might incriminate herself....in these circumstances more than enough reason to refuse to answer questions..imo

They had enough to worry the McCann's Portuguese lawyer. When Kingsley Napley were consulted on Saturday 8th their advice was to flee, which the McCanns did the following day.
madeleine page 268
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Benice on December 15, 2017, 10:36:20 AM
Apologies, here are my cites;

'madeleine' pdf doc.

Page 251

Carlos Pinto de Abreu and his assistant, Sofia,
were waiting for me inside. Carlos told me he’d
already had a long discussion with Luís Neves.
It
wasn’t looking good, he said. (1)

Page 252
Carlos came over and told me
not to be so definite in some of my answers. (2)

Page 254
Carlos still looked very concerned. There was a
great deal we needed to discuss, he told us. He
reiterated that the situation was not good. The PJ
had a lot of ‘evidence’ against us, a
nd I was certain
to be made an arguida in the morning. (1)

Page 257
What
would you do, Carlos? If one of your daughters was
missing, and this happened to you, what would you
do? Would you confess to a crime you hadn’t
committed, knowing full well it would mean everyone
would stop searching for her?’
‘I’d consider it, yes.’ (3)

Page 262
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. (3)

IMO Kate's lawyers's advice would have been influenced by his lengthy discussion with Luis Neves.

Unless we know what was discussed it's not possible to know what he was basing his advice on imo.

For instance, was he simply told'  'We have a lot of evidence against them' or was he given details of the...  'Lot of evidence'.

If the PJ had told him they had  irrefutable DNA evidence against the McCanns, then surely that would  have an effect on the advice he would give his client and IMO would be a reason to advise her to exercise her right to remain silent - thus leaving the ball firmly in the PJ's court to either put up (if what they claimed was true)  or shut up - if it wasn't.

Unless we know more about his 'long discussion' with Luis Neves and what Carlos concluded from it - then who knows?

Personally I get the impression that Carlos was persuaded that the PJ had 'evidence' which it later transpired was not to be the case.

All in my opinion.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Benice on December 15, 2017, 10:46:45 AM
They had enough to worry the McCann's Portuguese lawyer. When Kingsley Napley were consulted on Saturday 8th their advice was to flee, which the McCanns did the following day.
madeleine page 268

Didn't they go home just one day earlier than the date previously planned and which had been approved of by the PJ for their departure? 

If so - that's hardly 'fleeing' IMO.

Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 15, 2017, 10:57:15 AM
I thought there was room for error in the translations and the files are incomplete are they not?

The archiving report says none of the evidence used to make the McCann's arguidos....that's none of the evidence.....amounted to anything
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: stephen25000 on December 15, 2017, 10:58:39 AM
The archiving report says none of the evidence used to make the McCann's arguidos....that's none of the evidence.....amounted to anything

Please provide the cite.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on December 15, 2017, 11:10:29 AM
Then cite

My response has mysteriously vanished.
I will come at it from a different angle.
This was my stake in the ground on this topic.
"An arguido may lie without fear of redress whereas a witness may be punished by the courts for lying if caught out".

Which bit do you want a cite for?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 15, 2017, 11:13:12 AM
Please provide the cite.

I'm on my phone at the moment but I'm sure someone familiar with the case has the quote...are you not aware of it
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 15, 2017, 11:14:30 AM
My response has mysteriously vanished.
I will come at it from a different angle.
This was my stake in the ground on this topic.
"An arguido may lie without fear of redress whereas a witness may be punished by the courts for lying if caught out".

Which bit do you want a cite for?

No punishment for lying
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Brietta on December 15, 2017, 11:27:32 AM
Please provide the cite.

Therefore, after all seen, analysed and duly pondered, with all that is left exposed, it is determined:
 
a) The archiving of the Process concerning arguido Robert James Queriol Eveleigh Murat, because there are no indications of the practise of any crime under the dispositions of article 277 number 1 of the Penal Process Code;
 
b) The archiving of the Process concerning arguidos Gerald Patrick McCann and Kate Marie Healy, because there are no indications of the practise of any crime under the dispositions of article 277 number 1 of the Penal Process Code.
http://madeleinemccann.org/blog/2014/04/20/the-pjs-final-report-the-archiving-dispatch/#adi4

The reasoning behind that statement from the public prosecutors is laid out in greater detail in the previous pages of the final report.
Common sense dictates therefore that the evidence used to constitute these three individuals arguidos just didn't stand up to scrutiny: if it had ... the law would have taken a far different course from that which is on record.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: stephen25000 on December 15, 2017, 11:31:57 AM
Therefore, after all seen, analysed and duly pondered, with all that is left exposed, it is determined:
 
a) The archiving of the Process concerning arguido Robert James Queriol Eveleigh Murat, because there are no indications of the practise of any crime under the dispositions of article 277 number 1 of the Penal Process Code;
 
b) The archiving of the Process concerning arguidos Gerald Patrick McCann and Kate Marie Healy, because there are no indications of the practise of any crime under the dispositions of article 277 number 1 of the Penal Process Code.
http://madeleinemccann.org/blog/2014/04/20/the-pjs-final-report-the-archiving-dispatch/#adi4

The reasoning behind that statement from the public prosecutors is laid out in greater detail in the previous pages of the final report.
Common sense dictates therefore that the evidence used to constitute these three individuals arguidos just didn't stand up to scrutiny: if it had ... the law would have taken a far different course from that which is on record.


As a reminder, investigating the parents would be standard practice.

It remains the case, that no person has been arrested in relation to Madeleine's disappearance.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 15, 2017, 11:46:23 AM
As a reminder, investigating the parents would be standard practice.

It remains the case, that no person has been arrested in relation to Madeleine's disappearance.

As a reminder...imo everyone agree parents in such a case should always be considered as suspects...until being ruled out
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: stephen25000 on December 15, 2017, 12:01:49 PM
As a reminder...imo everyone agree parents in such a case should always be considered as suspects...until being ruled out

Subject to new evidence.

Likewise, we do not know what either 'investigation' is currently doing.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on December 15, 2017, 12:07:28 PM
No punishment for lying

Confirm the definition of "lying" upon which you rely is included in these:
"not telling the truth"; "untruthful"; "false"; "dishonest"; "mendacious"; "perfidious"; "deceitful".
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Brietta on December 15, 2017, 01:20:30 PM
Confirm the definition of "lying" upon which you rely is included in these:
"not telling the truth"; "untruthful"; "false"; "dishonest"; "mendacious"; "perfidious"; "deceitful".

It runs in my mind that the claim was made during discussion on the forum ... I've carried out a search but haven't come across it again.
I've got to admit it certainly doesn't sound kosher and Davel is correct to request a cite.  Maybe someone can come up with one ... or maybe will even remember the discussion.  So far it seems it is just you and I who seem to recall it.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: sadie on December 15, 2017, 01:24:26 PM
I would think that anything said when interviewed as an arguida can be used against you in court, as in Britain. It wouldn't help your case either if you later changed what you had said as an arguida.

Seems Kate's lawyer thought the PJ had a good case. He also expressed some concerns about some of her answers to questions on 6th. Hence his advice was either confess or say nothing.

With the alleged evidence of the dogs, Eddie and Keela, having been shown to be incorrect and have no value, I wonder how that lawyer feels now?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: sadie on December 15, 2017, 01:37:13 PM
They had enough to worry the McCann's Portuguese lawyer. When Kingsley Napley were consulted on Saturday 8th their advice was to flee, which the McCanns did the following day.
madeleine page 268
All based on Amarals not understanding of Eddie and Keelas alerts.  They had no evidence, but because Amaral pushed it, they thought that the PJ had evidence.

To make it clear Eddie and Keela provided questionable evidence, in contrast to Amarals belief that it was safe.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: sadie on December 15, 2017, 01:41:09 PM
No punishment for lying
Dreadful !   What are the Portuguese Authorities thinking of ?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: stephen25000 on December 15, 2017, 01:49:08 PM
Dreadful !   What are the Portuguese Authorities thinking of ?


What do you mean by that Sadie ?

Can you explain further ?


People do not always tell the truth, even in court.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: slartibartfast on December 15, 2017, 04:45:29 PM
It runs in my mind that the claim was made during discussion on the forum ... I've carried out a search but haven't come across it again.
I've got to admit it certainly doesn't sound kosher and Davel is correct to request a cite.  Maybe someone can come up with one ... or maybe will even remember the discussion.  So far it seems it is just you and I who seem to recall it.

Google is your friend.

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=wg1dvc2lfcEC&pg=PA126&lpg=PA126&dq=If+a+person+becomes+an+arguido,+they+automatically+gain+certain+rights+that+a+witness+or+suspect+would+not+have&source=bl&ots=0ezbf8kyLT&sig=TEoTJtQjcISyrfdsJ0tbX3ZXTP8&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjRrsGfu4zYAhWJuBQKHSLuCDgQ6AEwAnoECAkQAQ#v=onepage&q=If%20a%20person%20becomes%20an%20arguido%2C%20they%20automatically%20gain%20certain%20rights%20that%20a%20witness%20or%20suspect%20would%20not%20have&f=false (https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=wg1dvc2lfcEC&pg=PA126&lpg=PA126&dq=If+a+person+becomes+an+arguido,+they+automatically+gain+certain+rights+that+a+witness+or+suspect+would+not+have&source=bl&ots=0ezbf8kyLT&sig=TEoTJtQjcISyrfdsJ0tbX3ZXTP8&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjRrsGfu4zYAhWJuBQKHSLuCDgQ6AEwAnoECAkQAQ#v=onepage&q=If%20a%20person%20becomes%20an%20arguido%2C%20they%20automatically%20gain%20certain%20rights%20that%20a%20witness%20or%20suspect%20would%20not%20have&f=false)
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 15, 2017, 04:52:10 PM
Google is your friend.

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=wg1dvc2lfcEC&pg=PA126&lpg=PA126&dq=If+a+person+becomes+an+arguido,+they+automatically+gain+certain+rights+that+a+witness+or+suspect+would+not+have&source=bl&ots=0ezbf8kyLT&sig=TEoTJtQjcISyrfdsJ0tbX3ZXTP8&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjRrsGfu4zYAhWJuBQKHSLuCDgQ6AEwAnoECAkQAQ#v=onepage&q=If%20a%20person%20becomes%20an%20arguido%2C%20they%20automatically%20gain%20certain%20rights%20that%20a%20witness%20or%20suspect%20would%20not%20have&f=false (https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=wg1dvc2lfcEC&pg=PA126&lpg=PA126&dq=If+a+person+becomes+an+arguido,+they+automatically+gain+certain+rights+that+a+witness+or+suspect+would+not+have&source=bl&ots=0ezbf8kyLT&sig=TEoTJtQjcISyrfdsJ0tbX3ZXTP8&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjRrsGfu4zYAhWJuBQKHSLuCDgQ6AEwAnoECAkQAQ#v=onepage&q=If%20a%20person%20becomes%20an%20arguido%2C%20they%20automatically%20gain%20certain%20rights%20that%20a%20witness%20or%20suspect%20would%20not%20have&f=false)
So no legal action for lying.....would their be legal action for perverting the cause of justice..
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 15, 2017, 05:01:36 PM
Google is your friend.

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=wg1dvc2lfcEC&pg=PA126&lpg=PA126&dq=If+a+person+becomes+an+arguido,+they+automatically+gain+certain+rights+that+a+witness+or+suspect+would+not+have&source=bl&ots=0ezbf8kyLT&sig=TEoTJtQjcISyrfdsJ0tbX3ZXTP8&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjRrsGfu4zYAhWJuBQKHSLuCDgQ6AEwAnoECAkQAQ#v=onepage&q=If%20a%20person%20becomes%20an%20arguido%2C%20they%20automatically%20gain%20certain%20rights%20that%20a%20witness%20or%20suspect%20would%20not%20have&f=false (https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=wg1dvc2lfcEC&pg=PA126&lpg=PA126&dq=If+a+person+becomes+an+arguido,+they+automatically+gain+certain+rights+that+a+witness+or+suspect+would+not+have&source=bl&ots=0ezbf8kyLT&sig=TEoTJtQjcISyrfdsJ0tbX3ZXTP8&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjRrsGfu4zYAhWJuBQKHSLuCDgQ6AEwAnoECAkQAQ#v=onepage&q=If%20a%20person%20becomes%20an%20arguido%2C%20they%20automatically%20gain%20certain%20rights%20that%20a%20witness%20or%20suspect%20would%20not%20have&f=false)

I have actually provided this link before.....it still does not make sense....is perverting the course of justice an offence in Portugal
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: faithlilly on December 15, 2017, 05:20:28 PM
I've looked and at the moment can't find one....as you haven't provided a cite then it's just opinion by you too

You claimed that Colin Stagg refused to answer police questions while being interviewed yet he was innocent. Your insinuation was that innocent people DO refuse to answer questions. You have failed to prove this with your example.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on December 15, 2017, 05:35:02 PM
It runs in my mind that the claim was made during discussion on the forum ... I've carried out a search but haven't come across it again.
I've got to admit it certainly doesn't sound kosher and Davel is correct to request a cite.  Maybe someone can come up with one ... or maybe will even remember the discussion.  So far it seems it is just you and I who seem to recall it.

Try looking in "Toward a Prosecutor for the European Union Volume 1: A Comparative Analysis".
Section 18 pages 540 through 586.
In the full knowledge you will have to buy it at the paltry sum of 150 Euros or go to your reference library this is what it says:
"The Portuguese procedural system assigns the arguido the right to remain silent during the procedure from the moment he/she is formally designated arguido/arguida.
The fact that the arguido decides to remain silent cannot be detrimental to himself. Moreover the CCP does not threaten with a sanction of anykind the arguido that having decided to talk instead of remaining silent makes false declarations.
This does not confer a right to lie merely a right not to be punished for lying.
As a consequence of the right to remain silent the arguido has no duty of any kind to cooperate with investigative authorities for the purpose of determining the truth.
It should also be noted that as a refraction of the privilege against self incrimination the arguido cannot under circumstances make a declaration under oath.(CCP Article14(3))".


There is also a section relating to witnesses and a very informative bit re suspect definition and limiting time for arguido status. Not to mention sections for all member states of the EU which are also informative.
I'll leave you to buy the book or visit the library.
If you think the book is unreliable refer back to the EU they commissioned it.

p.s you could also try wiki  @)(++(*

The rights of an arguido

"If a person becomes an arguido, they automatically gain certain rights that a witness or suspect would not have.[7] An arguido has the right to be accompanied by a lawyer when questioned.[5] The investigating police may ask the arguido more direct accusatory questions (the answers to which would not be admissible in court if possibly self-incriminatory and asked of a non-arguido) but the arguido must be presented with whatever evidence is held against them,[7] and unlike a witness has the right to remain silent,[8] not to answer any question that may incriminate the person, and does not face legal action for lying.[9]"

https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmXoypizjW3WknFiJnKLwHCnL72vedxjQkDDP1mXWo6uco/wiki/Arguido.html

Pick the bones out of that!
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Brietta on December 15, 2017, 06:16:10 PM
Google is your friend.

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=wg1dvc2lfcEC&pg=PA126&lpg=PA126&dq=If+a+person+becomes+an+arguido,+they+automatically+gain+certain+rights+that+a+witness+or+suspect+would+not+have&source=bl&ots=0ezbf8kyLT&sig=TEoTJtQjcISyrfdsJ0tbX3ZXTP8&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjRrsGfu4zYAhWJuBQKHSLuCDgQ6AEwAnoECAkQAQ#v=onepage&q=If%20a%20person%20becomes%20an%20arguido%2C%20they%20automatically%20gain%20certain%20rights%20that%20a%20witness%20or%20suspect%20would%20not%20have&f=false (https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=wg1dvc2lfcEC&pg=PA126&lpg=PA126&dq=If+a+person+becomes+an+arguido,+they+automatically+gain+certain+rights+that+a+witness+or+suspect+would+not+have&source=bl&ots=0ezbf8kyLT&sig=TEoTJtQjcISyrfdsJ0tbX3ZXTP8&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjRrsGfu4zYAhWJuBQKHSLuCDgQ6AEwAnoECAkQAQ#v=onepage&q=If%20a%20person%20becomes%20an%20arguido%2C%20they%20automatically%20gain%20certain%20rights%20that%20a%20witness%20or%20suspect%20would%20not%20have&f=false)

Thank you.

Another contradiction in terms would appear to be ... "Portuguese law makes a distinction between arguido and suspect" automatically gaining certain rights that neither a witness or a suspect are entitled to.
Interestingly it also states that an arguido must be shown the evidence against him/her.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: slartibartfast on December 15, 2017, 06:39:42 PM
Anybody on trial who is found guilty is not charged with perjury just because they pleaded not guilty. Amaral was charged with making a false statement. That statement was not in a trial.

I’m surprised that wasn't obvious.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 15, 2017, 06:40:16 PM
Try looking in "Toward a Prosecutor for the European Union Volume 1: A Comparative Analysis".
Section 18 pages 540 through 586.
In the full knowledge you will have to buy it at the paltry sum of 150 Euros or go to your reference library this is what it says:
"The Portuguese procedural system assigns the arguido the right to remain silent during the procedure from the moment he/she is formally designated arguido/arguida.
The fact that the arguido decides to remain silent cannot be detrimental to himself. Moreover the CCP does not threaten with a sanction of anykind the arguido that having decided to talk instead of remaining silent makes false declarations.
This does not confer a right to lie merely a right not to be punished for lying.
As a consequence of the right to remain silent the arguido has no duty of any kind to cooperate with investigative authorities for the purpose of determining the truth.
It should also be noted that as a refraction of the privilege against self incrimination the arguido cannot under circumstances make a declaration under oath.(CCP Article14(3))".


There is also a section relating to witnesses and a very informative bit re suspect definition and limiting time for arguido status. Not to mention sections for all member states of the EU which are also informative.
I'll leave you to buy the book or visit the library.
If you think the book is unreliable refer back to the EU they commissioned it.

p.s you could also try wiki  @)(++(*

The rights of an arguido

"If a person becomes an arguido, they automatically gain certain rights that a witness or suspect would not have.[7] An arguido has the right to be accompanied by a lawyer when questioned.[5] The investigating police may ask the arguido more direct accusatory questions (the answers to which would not be admissible in court if possibly self-incriminatory and asked of a non-arguido) but the arguido must be presented with whatever evidence is held against them,[7] and unlike a witness has the right to remain silent,[8] not to answer any question that may incriminate the person, and does not face legal action for lying.[9]"[/b]

https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmXoypizjW3WknFiJnKLwHCnL72vedxjQkDDP1mXWo6uco/wiki/Arguido.html

Pick the bones out of that!

after the word "lying" there is a number 9 in brackets which suggests further clarification...without that clarification the claim is not clearly made
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 15, 2017, 06:43:27 PM
Putting aside the attempt to go off topic, anybody on trial who is found guilty is not charged with perjury just because they pleaded not guilty. Amaral was charged with making a false statement. That statement was not in a trial.

I’m surprised that wasn't obvious.

I didnt mnetion amaral and the post was not off topic as it relates to Kates arguido status. Amaral was charged with making a false statement and was questioned as a suspect ...arguido...when he made that statement...so what you are suggesting is arguidos can lie....but they cannot make false statements
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Benice on December 15, 2017, 06:55:16 PM
Putting aside the attempt to go off topic, anybody on trial who is found guilty is not charged with perjury just because they pleaded not guilty. Amaral was charged with making a false statement. That statement was not in a trial.

I’m surprised that wasn't obvious.

Is it actually known whether - like Kate, Amaral exercised his right to silence when he was made an arguido?    Just curious.

Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 15, 2017, 07:08:50 PM
If that is wiki it refers to their citation 9 whatever that is.
If it was something to do with me it was a typo as ( is shift 9; I miss it frequently 9 due to my crap keyboard skills)  ?{)(**

Thank you so much...its this...1 2 "Arguidos E Regresso". Dn.sapo.pt. Retrieved 2010-04-25.....unfortunately it does not seem to be there any more...so there is still a question
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on December 15, 2017, 07:18:50 PM
Im trying to but my post is deleted...try this.....after the word "lying" there is a number 9 in brackets which suggests further clarification...without that clarification the claim is not clearly made


If it was from Wiki it would be their ctatation 9 whatever that is 9 I would place more reliance on what was published in the works funded by the EU 0.

If it was in something I posted it is more than likely a typo caused by my crap keyboard skills.
( being shift9.  and ) being shift0. 9 I misstype that frequently)  8(>((


Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on December 15, 2017, 07:21:39 PM
Is it actually known whether - like Kate, Amaral exercised his right to silence when he was made an arguido?    Just curious.

Who cares?
Provided he exercised his rights under the law what difference does it make anyway?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on December 15, 2017, 07:25:48 PM
Thank you so much...its this...1 2 "Arguidos E Regresso". Dn.sapo.pt. Retrieved 2010-04-25.....unfortunately it does not seem to be there any more...so there is still a question

Only as far as wiki is concerned.
The other cite remains so pick holes in that but with the EU not me.

Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on December 15, 2017, 07:29:57 PM
I didnt mnetion amaral and the post was not off topic as it relates to Kates arguido status. wamaral was charged with making a false statement and was questioned as a suspect ...arguido...when he made that statement...so what you are suggesting is arguidos can lie....but they cannot make false statements

See my post 319
 (&^&
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 15, 2017, 07:36:27 PM
See my post 319
 (&^&


Confirm the definition of "lying" upon which you rely is included in these:
"not telling the truth"; "untruthful"; "false"; "dishonest"; "mendacious"; "perfidious"; "deceitful".


i agree
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: slartibartfast on December 15, 2017, 11:27:44 PM
This is getting silly, in most normal jurisdictions, defendants are not prosecuted over statements they have made either in or out of court which are not believed and they are found guilty.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: John on December 15, 2017, 11:44:57 PM
This is getting silly, in most normal jurisdictions, defendants are not prosecuted over statements they have made either in or out of court which are not believed and they are found guilty.

Statements have no relevance at trial but affidavits are accepted as evidence.  It is the testimony in the witness box that counts.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on December 15, 2017, 11:45:39 PM
This is getting silly, in most normal jurisdictions, defendants are not prosecuted over statements they have made either in or out of court which are not believed and they are found guilty.

That or deliberately obtuse mayhap?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 15, 2017, 11:47:55 PM
Statements have no relevance at trial but affidavits are accepted as evidence.  It is the testimony in the witness box that counts.

Surely statements given under caution....can be taken down and used in evidence against you
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 15, 2017, 11:59:59 PM
This is getting silly, in most normal jurisdictions, defendants are not prosecuted over statements they have made either in or out of court which are not believed and they are found guilty.

If they are found guilty ....yes....what about if they are found not guilty and new evidence comes to light which shows they have lied.....
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: John on December 16, 2017, 12:04:11 AM
Surely statements given under caution....can be taken down and used in evidence against you

Statements are used by the prosecution and the defence to prepare for trial.  Tape and video recordings of interviews are certainly used at trial.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 16, 2017, 12:06:57 AM
Statements are used by the prosecution and the defence to prepare for trial.  Tape and video recordings of interviews are certainly used at trial.

Are you saying written  signed statements...taken under caution.  Cannot be used at a trial...I dont think that is correct

None of the McCann statements were recorded as far as I am aware
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: barrier on December 16, 2017, 08:54:07 AM
Are you saying written  signed statements...taken under caution.  Cannot be used at a trial...I dont think that is correct



I would think if a suspect refused to take the stand then those statements would come into play.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 16, 2017, 11:25:51 AM
Please provide the cite.

To this can be added that, in reality, none of the indications that led to their constitution as arguidos was later confirmed or consolidated. If not, let us see: the information concerning a previous alert of the media before the polices was not confirmed, the traces that were marked by the dogs were not ratified in laboratory, and the initial indications from the above transcribed email, better clarified at a later date, ended up being revealed as innocuous.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: stephen25000 on December 16, 2017, 11:28:51 AM
To this can be added that, in reality, none of the indications that led to their constitution as arguidos was later confirmed or consolidated. If not, let us see: the information concerning a previous alert of the media before the polices was not confirmed, the traces that were marked by the dogs were not ratified in laboratory, and the initial indications from the above transcribed email, better clarified at a later date, ended up being revealed as innocuous.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm

They were neither ratified or dismissed.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 16, 2017, 11:30:09 AM
They were neither ratified or dismissed.

the pj assumed that the alerts confirmed an alert to cadaver odour..its in the files...they didnt..its in the files
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: stephen25000 on December 16, 2017, 11:31:16 AM
the pj assumed that the alerts confirmed an alert to cadaver odour..its in the files...they didnt..its in the files


I know.

It neither confirmed or dismissed them.

The files remain on record as do the alerts.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 16, 2017, 11:38:07 AM

I know.

It neither confirmed or dismissed them.

The files remain on record as do the alerts.

The point I am making is that the investigation led by amaral misinterpreted the alerts..it dismissed them as having no  evidential value
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: G-Unit on December 16, 2017, 11:53:49 AM
The point I am making is that the investigation led by amaral misinterpreted the alerts..it dismissed them as having no  evidential value

The investigation was coordinated by Amaral but those in charge were Luis Neves and Guilhermino Encarnação.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Brietta on December 16, 2017, 12:00:35 PM
The investigation was coordinated by Amaral but those in charge were Luis Neves and Guilhermino Encarnação.

So we keep being told ... however ... it was Amaral who was sacked.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: stephen25000 on December 16, 2017, 01:38:18 PM
A QUESTION SHE DID ANSWER

Q.  Are you aware that in not answering the questions you are jeopardising the investigation, which seeks to discover what happened to your daughter?

A.  'Yes, if that’s what the investigation thinks.'



Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1041635/The-48-questions-Kate-McCann-wouldnt-answer--did.html#ixzz51QlwY4MR
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 16, 2017, 01:52:04 PM
A QUESTION SHE DID ANSWER

Q.  Are you aware that in not answering the questions you are jeopardising the investigation, which seeks to discover what happened to your daughter?

A.  'Yes, if that’s what the investigation thinks.'



Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1041635/The-48-questions-Kate-McCann-wouldnt-answer--did.html#ixzz51QlwY4MR
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
You are quoting the opinion of a police investigation where the officers did not have a clue...imo...and Kate realised that
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: stephen25000 on December 16, 2017, 02:40:57 PM
You are quoting the opinion of a police investigation where the officers did not have a clue...imo...and Kate realised that

That is your opinion and that of the Mccann supporters.

As to Kate McCann's opinion, that is supposition.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: stephen25000 on December 16, 2017, 04:08:13 PM
How many questions didn't she answer in her interview ?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 16, 2017, 04:50:06 PM
How many questions didn't she answer in her interview ?

As the pj made a real pigs ear...imo..in taking the record of her interview we don't know but according to the non verbatim transcript s no questions were not answered
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: faithlilly on December 16, 2017, 06:14:27 PM
Innocent people may assert their right to stay silent but I can't think of one suspect who, after they have been cautioned, has refused to answer every question during all their interviews and subsequently not been found guilty, can you ?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on December 16, 2017, 06:47:16 PM
The terms verbatim and non-verbatim translations are bandied about with gay abandon but what precisely do they mean both in practical terms and grammatical terms ?. 

Verbatim translation, IMO, is not possible in the first place. For a start verbatim means word for word.
So either it is or it isn't word for word. If a statement is translated from one language to another manifestly it cannnot be verbatim therefore the terms "verbatim" and "non-verbatim" when used in connection with translation are completely meaningless.

The closest meaning one will have in practical terms when considering "verbatim translation" will be "a word-for-word translation that sticks as closely as possible to the structure and meaning of the original, without being adapted for a target audience in any way".
 
IMNSHO
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Robittybob1 on December 16, 2017, 07:26:42 PM
A QUESTION SHE DID ANSWER

Q.  Are you aware that in not answering the questions you are jeopardising the investigation, which seeks to discover what happened to your daughter?

A.  'Yes, if that’s what the investigation thinks.'

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1041635/The-48-questions-Kate-McCann-wouldnt-answer--did.html#ixzz51QlwY4MR
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
That is one of those delphic answers too, for it is only answerable if we know "what the investigation thinks"
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 16, 2017, 08:28:06 PM
The terms verbatim and non-verbatim translations are bandied about with gay abandon but what precisely do they mean both in practical terms and grammatical terms ?. 

Verbatim translation, IMO, is not possible in the first place. For a start verbatim means word for word.
So either it is or it isn't word for word. If a statement is translated from one language to another manifestly it cannnot be verbatim therefore the terms "verbatim" and "non-verbatim" when used in connection with translation are completely meaningless.

The closest meaning one will have in practical terms when considering "verbatim translation" will be "a word-for-word translation that sticks as closely as possible to the structure and meaning of the original, without being adapted for a target audience in any way".
 
IMNSHO

verbatim would be the mccanns statements being written down exactly as they were spoken...in english and then signed
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on December 16, 2017, 09:49:00 PM
verbatim would be the mccanns statements being written down exactly as they were spoken...in english and then signed

So who does the translation ? or are you suggesting an English person records the statement in whatever country it happens to be ?
Remember that the principle has to be capable of implementation outside the PdL bubble.
Why signed? Your contention is that the signature is worthless?
As what was done complies with EU law wrt translation what is your objection?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Carana on December 16, 2017, 10:07:15 PM
So who does the translation ? or are you suggesting an English person records the statement in whatever country it happens to be ?
Remember that the principle has to be capable of implementation outside the PdL bubble.
Why signed? Your contention is that the signature is worthless?
As what was done complies with EU law wrt translation what is your objection?

I've mentioned this before. In far less serious circumstances, I made a police statement in a country in which I didn't understand the language at the time. Someone interpreted for me, and I signed on the bottom line. All I could work out was the bottom line of a few words, and that was all I need to get the ball rolling. 

Years later, sorting through stuff, I found it again and can now understand what was written. Hardly anythihng was accurate.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on December 16, 2017, 10:38:19 PM
I've mentioned this before. In far less serious circumstances, I made a police statement in a country in which I didn't understand the language at the time. Someone interpreted for me, and I signed on the bottom line. All I could work out was the bottom line of a few words, and that was all I need to get the ball rolling. 

Years later, sorting through stuff, I found it again and can now understand what was written. Hardly anythihng was accurate.

It comes as no surprise. I started traveling abroad on business when I was 26 (in MXV BC that's a long time ago!)*. I learned rapidly that once beyond the soggy bit at Dover one took one's life in one's own hands. Help from the FCO being dependant on what bigger fish they had to fry (or boil) at the time. See Ian Richter.
I would say about Portugal though; it is not the backward country being portrayed by supporters it being at the cutting edge of some legislation. eg banning capital punishment about a century before the UK did.
But allegedly in the McCann case they had an interpreter provided by the FCO.

* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2__SqD8kTyw        ?{)(**

Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Brietta on December 16, 2017, 11:44:25 PM
It comes as no surprise. I started traveling abroad on business when I was 26 (in MXV BC that's a long time ago!)*. I learned rapidly that once beyond the soggy bit at Dover one took one's life in one's own hands. Help from the FCO being dependant on what bigger fish they had to fry (or boil) at the time. See Ian Richter.
I would say about Portugal though; it is not the backward country being portrayed by supporters it being at the cutting edge of some legislation. eg banning capital punishment about a century before the UK did.
But allegedly in the McCann case they had an interpreter provided by the FCO.

* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2__SqD8kTyw        ?{)(**

Are you able to substantiate your claim that 'supporters' ~ actually ... how puerile is this apparent need to label individuals as if they are the Borg ~ portray Portugal as a 'backward country'?

As far as I am concerned there is evidence that the Portuguese system is just fine ... for example, the right to maintain silence and the right to legal representation is something which is a matter of course.

The most 'backward' looking attitude - in my opinion - comes from those individuals who object to the legitimate use of those rights in conjunction with their disregard for evidence which defies their opinion of how things should be not how they are. 
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: slartibartfast on December 17, 2017, 12:12:05 AM
verbatim would be the mccanns statements being written down exactly as they were spoken...in english and then signed

They should have stayed in England then.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: John on December 17, 2017, 02:15:11 AM
the pj did not have any case imo....the pj were looling for a confession..if thats not self incriminatory I dont know what is. The whole point of arguido status is the pj can ask incriminating questions...that has to be a fact.

Universally, police will always look for a confession and they aren't usually too bothered how they get it as long as their actions remain within the rules.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: John on December 17, 2017, 02:19:19 AM
Apologies, here are my cites;

'madeleine' pdf doc.

Page 251

Carlos Pinto de Abreu and his assistant, Sofia,
were waiting for me inside. Carlos told me he’d
already had a long discussion with Luís Neves. It
wasn’t looking good, he said. (1)

Page 252
Carlos came over and told me
not to be so definite in some of my answers. (2)

Page 254
Carlos still looked very concerned. There was a
great deal we needed to discuss, he told us. He
reiterated that the situation was not good. The PJ
had a lot of ‘evidence’ against us, and I was certain
to be made an arguida in the morning. (1)

Page 257
What
would you do, Carlos? If one of your daughters was
missing, and this happened to you, what would you
do? Would you confess to a crime you hadn’t
committed, knowing full well it would mean everyone
would stop searching for her?’
‘I’d consider it, yes.’ (3)

Page 262
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. (3)

Clearly Carlos Pinto de Abreu was concerned that Kate McCann would incriminate herself after he was briefed on the evidence held by the police.   The safe option?

Personally, I've never heard of a mother of a missing child needing a 'safe option', if she was innocent she had nothing to fear.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: John on December 17, 2017, 02:23:28 AM
I don't think the pj had a case ...in fact they didn't because we have seen all the evidence
If they had wanted information to help the investigation they could have interviewed Kate as a witness
The fact they made her an arguido meant that they considered she might incriminate herself....in these circumstances more than enough reason to refuse to answer questions..imo

Actually we haven't, police will know much more than was ever put on paper.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: John on December 17, 2017, 02:40:45 AM
Kate McCann never mentioned Amaral in her account of the happenings of 6th and 7th of September. Luis Neves was there and met with her lawyer. Luis Neves was head of the DCCB, Portugal's equivalent of SOCA in the UK. He and Guilhermino Encarnacão, the director of the Algarve Policia Judiciaria (PJ) were in charge of the investigation, not Amaral. Why do people insist on targeting Amaral as if he was the only person who was involved in decision making and analysis?

Amaral was the target and still is, even Correia admitted that in a moment of weakness..."The target has been hit".
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: John on December 17, 2017, 02:57:03 AM
I would think if a suspect refused to take the stand then those statements would come into play.

If a suspect refused to testify then there wouldn't be any opportunity to ask questions about them.  Asking another witness amounts to hearsay.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: G-Unit on December 17, 2017, 08:01:31 AM
Clearly Carlos Pinto de Abreu was concerned that Kate McCann would incriminate herself after he was briefed on the evidence held by the police.   The safe option?

Personally, I've never heard of a mother of a missing child needing a 'safe option', if she was innocent she had nothing to fear.

He saw something we have never seen; Kate McCann under pressure. According to Fiona Payne she could be volatile;

Kate's very reactive, you know, she's, she's a completely different personality and, you know, if she's angry she'll show she's angry and when she's upset she'll show she's upset,

Gerry was more controlled;

Gerry can be, erm, he's more able to, to sort of see through all that and just think, hang on what's right for, what's right, what's going to get us further forward here, you know, getting upset and screaming at the Police isn't going to get us anywhere and he's always sort of pulling Kate back a bit really and saying, 'Look, that that's not going to help, we've got to do this',
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/FIONA-PAYNE-ROGATORY.htm
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: barrier on December 17, 2017, 08:58:51 AM
If a suspect refused to testify then there wouldn't be any opportunity to ask questions about them.  Asking another witness amounts to hearsay.

Wouldn't their lawyer read it out then? I've no idea how it works in court,surely the part "you later rely on" comes into it,or is the jury not allowed to hear it?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: John on December 17, 2017, 09:55:31 AM
Wouldn't their lawyer read it out then? I've no idea how it works in court,surely the part "you later rely on" comes into it,or is the jury not allowed to hear it?

Hearsay evidence is not usually permitted in a trial and that is why witnesses require to give evidence. 
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: barrier on December 17, 2017, 09:59:17 AM
Hearsay evidence is not usually permitted in a trial and that is why witnesses require to give evidence.

Wouldn't be hearsay would it,once cautioned its taken down,is it not signed by the suspect?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: John on December 17, 2017, 10:07:21 AM
Wouldn't be hearsay would it,once cautioned its taken down,is it not signed by the suspect?

Only the person who made the statement can answer to it and that is why they go into the witness box. If a suspect chooses not to testify then their statements will not be seen by the jury. The same applies to audio and video recordings but the judge can allow them if he or she deems it relevant to the public interest. Similiarly, prior convictions aren't revealed to a jury.

Statements are used by the prosecution and the defence to prepare for trial.  Certainly, lawyers will direct questions to witnesses based on what they have already discovered in those statements in order to elicit an appropriate response.  At the end of the day however, it is what is heard from the witness box that counts.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: barrier on December 17, 2017, 10:12:49 AM
Only the person who made the statement can answer to it and that is why they go into the witness box. If a suspect chooses not to testify then their statements will not be seen by the jury. The same applies to audio and video recordings but the judge can allow them if he or she deems it relevant to the public interest. Similiarly, prior convictions aren't revealed to a jury.

Statements are used by the prosecution and the defence to prepare for trial.  Certainly, lawyers will direct questions to witnesses based on what they have already discovered in those statements in order to elicit an appropriate response.  At the end of the day however, it is what is heard from the witness box that counts.

Thank you John.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 17, 2017, 10:17:27 AM
Only the person who made the statement can answer to it and that is why they go into the witness box. If a suspect chooses not to testify then their statements will not be seen by the jury. The same applies to audio and video recordings but the judge can allow them if he or she deems it relevant to the public interest. Similiarly, prior convictions aren't revealed to a jury.

Statements are used by the prosecution and the defence to prepare for trial.  Certainly, lawyers will direct questions to witnesses based on what they have already discovered in those statements in order to elicit an appropriate response.  At the end of the day however, it is what is heard from the witness box that counts.

not in the case of the ciprianos john.....
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Benice on December 17, 2017, 10:22:51 AM
Only the person who made the statement can answer to it and that is why they go into the witness box. If a suspect chooses not to testify then their statements will not be seen by the jury. The same applies to audio and video recordings but the judge can allow them if he or she deems it relevant to the public interest. Similiarly, prior convictions aren't revealed to a jury.

Statements are used by the prosecution and the defence to prepare for trial.  Certainly, lawyers will direct questions to witnesses based on what they have already discovered in those statements in order to elicit an appropriate response.  At the end of the day however, it is what is heard from the witness box that counts.

I'm no expert on any of this, but my son is presently a witness in an ongoing murder trial.    According to him, statements made by the defendants at the police station (questions and their answers) are being read out (verbatim)  to the court.     The defendants have not appeared in the witness box so far, but whether this will change I have no idea at the moment.   Do you think they will be called now that their statements have been revealed to the jury - or can they still decline?



Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 17, 2017, 10:25:32 AM
I'm no expert on any of this, but my son is presently a witness in an ongoing murder trial.    According to him, statements made by the defendants at the police station (questions and their answers) are being read out (verbatim)  to the court.     The defendants have not appeared in the witness box so far, but whether this will change I have no idea at the moment.   Do you think they will be called now that their statements have been revealed to the jury - or can they still decline?

Its fairly basic law...they can of course decline to give evidence and any statement they have made under caution can be used in court as evidence against them
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: barrier on December 17, 2017, 10:31:08 AM
I'm no expert on any of this, but my son is presently a witness in an ongoing murder trial.    According to him, statements made by the defendants at the police station (questions and their answers) are being read out (verbatim)  to the court.     The defendants have not appeared in the witness box so far, but whether this will change I have no idea at the moment.   Do you think they will be called now that their statements have been revealed to the jury - or can they still decline?

I would think now its been revealed the the prosecution can question,interesting to see if its the case.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 17, 2017, 10:34:10 AM
I would think now its been revealed the the prosecution can question,interesting to see if its the case.

the defendants do not have to answer any questions and any statements made under caution can be used against them...simple basic law
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: barrier on December 17, 2017, 10:48:25 AM
the defendants do not have to answer any questions and any statements made under caution can be used against them...simple basic law

If they have made no comment through-out the proceedings possibly yes,but once a statement is made under caution does this negate that.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: John on December 17, 2017, 10:48:44 AM
not in the case of the ciprianos john.....

That is exactly what occurred in the Cipiano case.  João Cipriano refused to testify so the judge allowed the police video of him reenacting how he cut up the child's body to be shown to the jury.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 17, 2017, 10:53:26 AM
That is exactly what occurred in the Cipiano case.  João Cipriano refused to testify so the judge allowed the police video of him reenacting how he cut up the child's body to be shown to the jury.

so the video evidence was allowed to be used......I agree....so statements...audio and visual can be used in court
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: John on December 17, 2017, 10:55:46 AM
I'm no expert on any of this, but my son is presently a witness in an ongoing murder trial.    According to him, statements made by the defendants at the police station (questions and their answers) are being read out (verbatim)  to the court.     The defendants have not appeared in the witness box so far, but whether this will change I have no idea at the moment.   Do you think they will be called now that their statements have been revealed to the jury - or can they still decline?

Witness statements can only be used in such a manner if both the prosecution and the defence agree to it and it is allowed by the presiding judge.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: John on December 17, 2017, 10:57:13 AM
so the video evidence was allowed to be used......I agree....so statements...audio and visual can be used in court

They can be certainly in certain circumstances but only at the judges discretion.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 17, 2017, 11:02:35 AM
They can be certainly in certain circumstances but only at the judges discretion.

fair enough
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: faithlilly on December 17, 2017, 01:06:53 PM
So can we all agree that while innocent people have in the past refused to answer questions put to them by police the number is so small that providing a cite for the same is almost impossible ?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 17, 2017, 01:45:41 PM
So can we all agree that while innocent people have in the past refused to answer questions put to them by police the number is so small that providing a cite for the same is almost impossible ?

I would say that on the whole it is the guilty  that take the right to silence ...but on occasions for very good reasons  an innocent person will take the right to silence...that is a fact.  Kate took the right to silence,...it is pure speculation to suggest thats  because she had something to hide....so posters an speculate ...but thats all it is
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: faithlilly on December 17, 2017, 03:07:45 PM
I would say that on the whole it is the guilty  that take the right to silence ...but on occasions for very good reasons  an innocent person will take the right to silence...that is a fact.  Kate took the right to silence,...it is pure speculation to suggest thats  because she had something to hide....so posters an speculate ...but thats all it is

A very few occasions as you haven't even been able to give me one cite.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Robittybob1 on December 17, 2017, 05:05:51 PM
A very few occasions as you haven't even been able to give me one cite.
It was his opinion so he doesn't need a cite.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Benice on December 17, 2017, 06:20:32 PM
So can we all agree that while innocent people have in the past refused to answer questions put to them by police the number is so small that providing a cite for the same is almost impossible ?

Can we also agree that anyone reading the 48 questions would be left in no doubt that their only purpose was to find evidence to pin the crime on Kate McCann.    And that mindful of some of Amaral and his team's 'unusual' ideas of what constituted compelling evidence in their eyes (i.e. the dream!)   - she would have been off her rocker to ignore the excellent advice from her lawyer.

AIMHO

Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Carana on December 17, 2017, 08:14:07 PM
So can we all agree that while innocent people have in the past refused to answer questions put to them by police the number is so small that providing a cite for the same is almost impossible ?

Hard to know how many people choose to remain silent or not, in which circumstances, in which jurisdiction and what the surrounding circumstances of any trial by media may have been.

I've never been in such a situation.

 

A possible insight?

https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/analysis/going-no-comment-a-delicate-balancing-act/65781.article
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on December 17, 2017, 10:42:57 PM
Can we also agree that anyone reading the 48 questions would be left in no doubt that their only purpose was to find evidence to pin the crime on Kate McCann.    And that mindful of some of Amaral and his team's 'unusual' ideas of what constituted compelling evidence in their eyes (i.e. the dream!)   - she would have been off her rocker to ignore the excellent advice from her lawyer.

AIMHO

Once she had been constituted arguida that could not happen.
Had the police wished to have her incriminate herself they would have let her remain a witness.

"Sometimes when the police suspect someone, they call that person in as a witness.

"They don't constitute him as arguido and they extract as much information from him as they can, because as a witness he cannot refuse to collaborate with the police.

"Now the moment he is constituted as arguido, as the defendant, then he can not only refuse to answer questions because they can incriminate him, but also he has the right to be accompanied in the questionings by his own solicitor."
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Robittybob1 on December 17, 2017, 11:11:03 PM
Once she had been constituted arguida that could not happen.
Had the police wished to have her incriminate herself they would have let her remain a witness.

"Sometimes when the police suspect someone, they call that person in as a witness.

"They don't constitute him as arguido and they extract as much information from him as they can, because as a witness he cannot refuse to collaborate with the police.

"Now the moment he is constituted as arguido, as the defendant, then he can not only refuse to answer questions because they can incriminate him, but also he has the right to be accompanied in the questionings by his own solicitor."

You have quotes here but not specifying the source.  Where do the quotes come from?  The method seems rather questionably dubious.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Carana on December 18, 2017, 09:42:31 AM
If I had reason to suspect that the purpose was to stitch me up, which Kate seemingly did, I'm fairly sure I'd take the lawyer's advice as well.

As someone once said, "you have the right to remain silent, but anything you do say will be scrunched up and rammed down your throat".

A lecture by a law professor (a former defense attorney) and... a cop:

Don't talk to cops.

 [youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE[/youtube]
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: faithlilly on December 18, 2017, 10:35:08 AM
If I had reason to suspect that the purpose was to stitch me up, which Kate seemingly did, I'm fairly sure I'd take the lawyer's advice as well.

As someone once said, "you have the right to remain silent, but anything you do say will be scrunched up and rammed down your throat".

A lecture by a law professor (a former defense attorney) and... a cop:

Don't talk to cops.

 [youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE[/youtube]

If by answering all the questions truthfully it may take the focus off her and redirect the investigation's focus on to who actually did take Madeleine don't you think for Kate that was worth a punt ?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on December 18, 2017, 11:33:31 AM
You have quotes here but not specifying the source.  Where do the quotes come from?  The method seems rather questionably dubious.

Some windbag of a know from nothing Portuguese advogado who knows less than the average punter on here.
I'll dig it out later.
Or you could do some of your own research on the topic.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Carana on December 18, 2017, 11:35:55 AM
If by answering all the questions truthfully it may take the focus off her and redirect the investigation's focus on to who actually did take Madeleine don't you think for Kate that was worth a punt ?

She'd answered all the questions up until arguida time.

If what she describes in her book is accurate about the lawyer disappearing for a while and then hinting that it might be in her interest to consider confessing (and if that isn't accurate, I've no doubt that we'd have heard all about it), then I'm fairly sure I'd have been suspicious as well. I don't have the book to hand, so I can't cite the passage.

Some of the questions seem fairly commonplace, e.g. what did she see upon entering the flat, but I find a number of others difficult to answer in a way that couldn't be "misunderstood".

--- Asked about her professional life, and in how many hospitals and in which she had worked, she did not respond. Being a doctor, and asked about her speciality, she did not respond. Asked about if she worked in shifts, in emergencies [the emergency section of a hospital] or other services she did not respond. If she worked every day, she did not respond. Asked if at a particular time she stopped working and why, she did not respond.

She'd trained as an anaesthetist, prior to retraining as a GP.

--- Asked whether or not it is true that the twins have difficulty sleeping, that they are restless and that that causes her uneasiness, she did not respond.

--- Asked whether or not it is true that at certain times she felt desperate [driven to despair; angered; exasperated] by the attitude of the children and that that left her much disquiet [unease], she did not respond.


According to extracts from her diary (assuming that were accurately described), the twins did have trouble settling down on occasion, and there was a toddler tantrum incident in the car one day.

I'm aware that she wouldn't have known the questions in advance, but I have no problem imagining how answers to those (and numerous others) could feed into a prosecution case.

In her view, they'd stopped looking for her anyway.  If she'd got banged up on remand (and Gerry would probably have been as well, IMO), how on earth could they carry on searching for their missing child?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Carana on December 18, 2017, 11:43:55 AM
Some windbag of a know from nothing Portuguese advogado who knows less than the average punter on here.
I'll dig it out later.
Or you could do some of your own research on the topic.

Lol
I dug out the relevant articles on this years ago, and, from memory, the windbag was correct. The laws have since changed slightly, but that's neither here nor there.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: jassi on December 18, 2017, 11:46:45 AM
She'd answered all the questions up until arguida time.

If what she describes in her book is accurate about the lawyer disappearing for a while and then hinting that it might be in her interest to consider confessing (and if that isn't accurate, I've no doubt that we'd have heard all about it), then I'm fairly sure I'd have been suspicious as well. I don't have the book to hand, so I can't cite the passage.

Some of the questions seem fairly commonplace, e.g. what did she see upon entering the flat, but I find a number of others difficult to answer in a way that couldn't be "misunderstood".

--- Asked about her professional life, and in how many hospitals and in which she had worked, she did not respond. Being a doctor, and asked about her speciality, she did not respond. Asked about if she worked in shifts, in emergencies [the emergency section of a hospital] or other services she did not respond. If she worked every day, she did not respond. Asked if at a particular time she stopped working and why, she did not respond.

She'd trained as an anaesthetist.

--- Asked whether or not it is true that the twins have difficulty sleeping, that they are restless and that that causes her uneasiness, she did not respond.

--- Asked whether or not it is true that at certain times she felt desperate [driven to despair; angered; exasperated] by the attitude of the children and that that left her much disquiet [unease], she did not respond.


According to extracts from her diary (assuming that were accurately described), the twins did have trouble settling down on occasion, and there was a toddler tantrum incident in the car one day.

I'm aware that she wouldn't have known the questions in advance, but I have no problem imagining how answers to those (and numerous others) could feed into a prosecution case.

In her view, they'd stopped looking for her anyway.  If she'd got banged up on remand (and Gerry would probably have been as well, IMO), how on earth could they carry on searching for their missing child?

Would we?
Only the lawyer involved would know if it were true. Would he say anything years later when the book was published, or would he just ignore it and get on with his life ?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Benice on December 18, 2017, 12:22:35 PM
Would we?
Only the lawyer involved would know if it were true. Would he say anything years later when the book was published, or would he just ignore it and get on with his life ?

Kate's book would have been scrutinised to the Nth degree to ensure that there was nothing in it that could be proved to be untrue or be regarded as libellous - before it went to publication.  IMO

The fact that no-one has attempted to sue her or even publicly complained that something written about them personally in the book is completely untrue - would indicate that the book contains nothing to give anyone mentioned within it a reason to challenge its veracity. IMO

Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Angelo222 on December 18, 2017, 12:27:18 PM
Kate's book would have been scrutinised to the Nth degree to ensure that there was nothing in it that could be proved to be untrue or be regarded as libellous - before it went to publication.  IMO

The fact that no-one has attempted to sue her or even publicly complained that something written about them personally in the book is completely untrue - would indicate that the book contains nothing to give anyone mentioned within it a reason to challenge its veracity. IMO

It might not be libellous but it reminds me of a precocious child throwing a tantrum.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Carana on December 18, 2017, 12:33:30 PM
Would we?
Only the lawyer involved would know if it were true. Would he say anything years later when the book was published, or would he just ignore it and get on with his life ?

I was referring to what apparently transpired at the police station - and I haven't seen any denial by the PJ.

The lawyer did speak out to correct the "misunderstanding" over the alleged "plea deal". He was apparently explaining the type of sentence she could expect in various scenarios.

Technically, the PJ didn't actually put a plea deal to her... but if her account is accurate, a back-door route via the lawyer would amount to much the same thing, IMO.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Angelo222 on December 18, 2017, 12:55:59 PM
I was referring to what apparently transpired at the police station - and I haven't seen any denial by the PJ.

The lawyer did speak out to correct the "misunderstanding" over the alleged "plea deal". He was apparently explaining the type of sentence she could expect in various scenarios.

I agree.  Police have numerous tools at their discretion which they use to extract a confession. 
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: kizzy on December 18, 2017, 05:35:26 PM
I think from the outset, like now.

Reputation etc etc has always been at the forefront for the mccanns.

If only as much care had been put into looking after maddie, instead of themselves

Its always been about them, even now.

He answered questions, she didn't. always a plan to safeguard themselves.

all the above post IMO
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on December 18, 2017, 05:39:54 PM
You have quotes here but not specifying the source.  Where do the quotes come from? The method seems rather questionably dubious.

Sr Artur Rego.
Plug "Rights of an Arguido" into your search engine then dick about until you find the BBC News Channel 8th Sept 2007. You will then find: "Artur Rego, a Portuguese lawyer, told BBC News:"


If you think Sr Rego is talking blx tell him and the BBC. I am sure both will value your input.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Brietta on December 18, 2017, 07:20:07 PM
Sr Artur Rego.
Plug "Rights of an Arguido" into your search engine then dick about until you find the BBC News Channel 8th Sept 2007. You will then find: "Artur Rego, a Portuguese lawyer, told BBC News:"


If you think Sr Rego is talking blx tell him and the BBC. I am sure both will value your input.

What action can the courts take against an arguido?


The police can use their powers to bring the suspect before a judge to ask for restrictions to be imposed on their movements.

If they do, they could be banned from leaving their house or the area, or held in custody while the case continues.

In this case, the suspect is not subject to a judge's order, but has signed an identity and residence statement.

It prevents the person moving house or leaving the country. If they stay anywhere other than their given place of residence for more than five days they have to notify police.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6657977.stm

The police allowed Kate and Gerry McCann to leave Portugal as scheduled ... so apart from being questioned, they didn't appear to be too concerned about imposing any restrictions on them as might have been expected.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: slartibartfast on December 18, 2017, 07:21:13 PM
What action can the courts take against an arguido?


The police can use their powers to bring the suspect before a judge to ask for restrictions to be imposed on their movements.

If they do, they could be banned from leaving their house or the area, or held in custody while the case continues.

In this case, the suspect is not subject to a judge's order, but has signed an identity and residence statement.

It prevents the person moving house or leaving the country. If they stay anywhere other than their given place of residence for more than five days they have to notify police.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6657977.stm

The police allowed Kate and Gerry McCann to leave Portugal as scheduled ... so apart from being questioned, they didn't appear to be too concerned about imposing any restrictions on them as might have been expected.

Maybe the Portuguese knew who they were and where they lived.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Brietta on December 18, 2017, 07:31:30 PM
Maybe the Portuguese knew who they were and where they lived.

There is that, I suppose, but I was thinking there might have been deeper reasoning behind their sangfroid.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on December 18, 2017, 07:33:07 PM
What action can the courts take against an arguido?


The police can use their powers to bring the suspect before a judge to ask for restrictions to be imposed on their movements.

If they do, they could be banned from leaving their house or the area, or held in custody while the case continues.

In this case, the suspect is not subject to a judge's order, but has signed an identity and residence statement.

It prevents the person moving house or leaving the country. If they stay anywhere other than their given place of residence for more than five days they have to notify police.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6657977.stm

The police allowed Kate and Gerry McCann to leave Portugal as scheduled ... so apart from being questioned, they didn't appear to be too concerned about imposing any restrictions on them as might have been expected.

I don't follow the relevance of your remark to my post #445.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Brietta on December 18, 2017, 07:38:59 PM
I don't follow the relevance of your remark to my post #445.

I did follow your direction to come up with the relevant cite (not quite ... it was actually a lot less convoluted) ... so look upon it as me doing you a service by providing it as well as saving the members the bother of looking for it.

All heart me.   8(0(*
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: sadie on December 18, 2017, 07:49:27 PM
Sr Artur Rego.
Plug "Rights of an Arguido" into your search engine then dick about until you find the BBC News Channel 8th Sept 2007. You will then find: "Artur Rego, a Portuguese lawyer, told BBC News:"


If you think Sr Rego is talking blx tell him and the BBC. I am sure both will value your input.

The way I see it is this.

Making The Mccanns arguidos was based upon Amarals misunderstanding of Eddie and Keelas alerts.  Had he understood them he would have realised that he had no reasons at all to suspect them IMO.

Artur Rego would not have known about the mistakes with the dogs readings ... and because of this what we could take from his reading of the situation is in actual fact blx, as you so delightfully put it.



Kate and Gerry would have known that the interpretations of the dogs alerts were false, because they would have known that Madeleine had not lain dead within the apartment; that they didn't carry a cadaver in the car, nor had they anything that had been in contact with a dead Madeleine.

The only things that might have had cadaver odour on them were Kates clothes, which may have come about when, as a GP, she would have certified death on patients that had died.   I guess the same is possible with Gerry, but less likely IMO.   Remember the cadaverine scent does not wash out of clothes.

Kate and Gerry would have known that they were being stitched up on false evidence ... and almost certainly would have been told about what happened in the Cipriano and Michael Cook cases.  It must have been terrifying for them
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: stephen25000 on December 18, 2017, 07:59:13 PM
The way I see it is this.

Making The Mccanns arguidos was based upon Amarals misunderstanding of Eddie and Keelas alerts.  Had he understood them he would have realised that he had no reasons at all to suspect them IMO.

Artur Rego would not have known about the mistakes with the dogs readings ... and because of this what we could take from his reading of the situation is in actual fact blx, as you so delightfully put it.



Kate and Gerry would have known that the interpretations of the dogs alerts were false, because they would have known that Madeleine had not lain dead within the apartment; that they didn't carry a cadaver in the car, nor had they anything that had been in contact with a dead Madeleine.

The only things that might have had cadaver odour on them were Kates clothes, which may have come about when, as a GP, she would have certified death on patients that had died.   I guess the same is possible with Gerry, but less likely IMO.   Remember the cadaverine scent does not wash out of clothes.

Kate and Gerry would have known that they were being stitched up on false evidence ... and almost certainly would have been told about what happened in the Cipriano and Michael Cook cases.  It must have been terrifying for them

1. The Mccanns were suspects for a variety of reasons, one being there was no evidence of abduction.

2. It is not known what happened to Madeleine.

3. Cadaverine is soluble in water. Easily found on research as to it's properties, or if you have knowledge of Organic Chemistry.

4. The 'stitching up' an opinion and unproven. 

5. The forensic results neither affirmed or dismissed the possibility of a body having been in the apartment.

Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Carana on December 18, 2017, 09:02:38 PM
What action can the courts take against an arguido?


The police can use their powers to bring the suspect before a judge to ask for restrictions to be imposed on their movements.

If they do, they could be banned from leaving their house or the area, or held in custody while the case continues.

In this case, the suspect is not subject to a judge's order, but has signed an identity and residence statement.

It prevents the person moving house or leaving the country. If they stay anywhere other than their given place of residence for more than five days they have to notify police.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6657977.stm

The police allowed Kate and Gerry McCann to leave Portugal as scheduled ... so apart from being questioned, they didn't appear to be too concerned about imposing any restrictions on them as might have been expected.

That might be what Rob's thinking of.

Is it, Rob?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Robittybob1 on December 18, 2017, 10:24:43 PM
That might be what Rob's thinking of.

Is it, Rob?
No it wasn't that article but thanks any way for it answered another question I had asked Alice.  (about the statements made by Artur Rego:
 "Artur Rego, a Portuguese lawyer, told BBC News: "Arguido is the person who has been accused of being the perpetrator.

"This is just an accusation made exactly at the end of the investigation."

A person can ask for arguido status if they feel the line of questioning is implying that they are a suspect. This gives them more rights than a witness would have.

What rights does an arguido have?

Arguido status gives a range of legal protections, such as the right to remain silent and the right to a lawyer during questioning.

Mr Rego said: "Sometimes when they [the police] suspect someone, they call that person in as a witness.

"They don't constitute him as arguido and they extract as much information from him as they can, because as a witness he cannot refuse to collaborate with the police.

"Now the moment he is constituted as arguido, as the defendant, then he can not only refuse to answer questions because they can incriminate him, but also he has the right to be accompanied in the questionings by his own solicitor."

Once someone is an arguido they can be arrested, but only if there is sufficient evidence.

What action can the courts take against an arguido?

The police can use their powers to bring the suspect before a judge to ask for restrictions to be imposed on their movements.

If they do, they could be banned from leaving their house or the area, or held in custody while the case continues.

In this case, the suspect is not subject to a judge's order, but has signed an identity and residence statement.

It prevents the person moving house or leaving the country. If they stay anywhere other than their given place of residence for more than five days they have to notify police.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Robittybob1 on December 18, 2017, 10:58:03 PM
That might be what Rob's thinking of.

Is it, Rob?
This sounds more like it.  http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RE_ENACTMENT.htm
This was it  "From the elements brought to the process it can be stated unequivocally that the arguidos did not violate any of the obligations imposed upon them by the restraining orders that were applied, according to article 196 of the CPP and on the other hand, no grounds are found to apply any other restraining order: the arguidos live in the UK at the address they indicated, as they are currently in the UK no possibility of their interference with the production of evidence, or its acquisition, conservation or veracity can be seen and finally, taking into account their current place of residence, there is no risk for the disturbance of public order and tranquillity."
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Brietta on December 19, 2017, 12:25:46 AM
1. The Mccanns were suspects for a variety of reasons, one being there was no evidence of abduction.

2. It is not known what happened to Madeleine.

3. Cadaverine is soluble in water. Easily found on research as to it's properties, or if you have knowledge of Organic Chemistry.

4. The 'stitching up' an opinion and unproven. 

5. The forensic results neither affirmed or dismissed the possibility of a body having been in the apartment.

According to Ricardo Paiva Kate and Gerry Mccann had been under suspicion right from the beginning: "He admitted that the police had been suspicious of the McCanns from the start of the investigation." http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/portugal/6977977/Madeleine-McCann-mothers-dream-was-turning-point-in-investigation-court-hears.html

If his assessment of the situation was a correct one, for their own protection perhaps consideration should have been given to making them arguidos.
However it seems the police had already made up their minds ... they had the solution in theory ... and the golden hours of Madeleine's disappearance were devoted to making that theory stick.  They needed evidence to do that.
Quote
JOSE MANUEL OLIVEIRA
Crime reporter, 'Diario de Noticias'
Information started circulating from sources connected to the Portuguese police that the story was full of holes from the side of the McCanns and their friends. Indeed within two days of Madeleine disappearing, this crime correspondent was filing this piece in the Portuguese Daily: Diario of the Noticias: "Headline: a badly told story." We started to receive information according to which the police suspected the theory they had apprehensions, didn't believe the theory that she had been kidnapped. To conclude, the police started to suspect the parents from the word go.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=post;quote=436630;topic=8287.465

The police had no evidence to support any of their suppositions: So having established that there was no evidence to support the almost immediate suppositions ... why did the police keep up on grasping for straws in the hope of laying charges against Madeleine's parents.

The "turning point" in the case against the McCanns according to Paiva, was his allegation that Kate had a dream.

Think about that one very carefully.  The man was a senior detective in an investigation and the best the investigation could come up with for evidence was a dream.  If the implication of that wasn't so sad it would be laughable.

If Kate and Gerry McCann had held out hope that the police had Madeleine's best interests at the heart of their investigation they must have been in despair when they became the focus of the investigation to realise they were on their own and the only hope for their missing child.

Kate is on record as screaming her anguish of "letting Madeleine down" ... exercising her right to silence when she knew the police had it all so wrong was in my opinion a sure fire way of making sure Madeleine wasn't let down again ... and her determination paid dividends when Madeleine's case was opened again in Britain and in Portugal.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Brietta on December 19, 2017, 02:19:07 AM
The question given was whether or not Kate was right not to answer the forty eight questions presented to her as an arguida ... and the answer must be, that of course she was.
In my opinion anything at all would have sufficed to give the police their excuse to lock her up and metaphorically speaking lock up any possibility with her that Madeleine had, of someone who cared enough about her to keep on searching for the living breathing child she may be.

The police had given up on that as the cites I included in my previous post prove.  They decided in the golden hours of her disappearance that she was dead and they also decided exactly who was responsible and apart from a small detour via Murat they held to that throughout.

An investigation relying on a dream is not in my opinion credible.  An investigation which is incapable of understanding forensic evidence is not in my opinion fit for purpose ... there simply is no excuse for it.

In my opinion Kate used the only defence her daughter had to be looked for and that was her silence.  As it was until she got the ear of the then home secretary Alan Johnson in 2010 only she and Gerry had been fighting in Madeleine's corner and on many fronts.
The fact they had to take on all comers to achieve what they did is probably one of the most distasteful episodes imaginable. But achieve it they did ... and all credit to them for doing so and it started when Kate kept herself out of jail when as an arguida she exercised her rights ... good on her!

Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Carana on December 19, 2017, 02:22:04 AM
This sounds more like it.  http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RE_ENACTMENT.htm
This was it  "From the elements brought to the process it can be stated unequivocally that the arguidos did not violate any of the obligations imposed upon them by the restraining orders that were applied, according to article 196 of the CPP and on the other hand, no grounds are found to apply any other restraining order: the arguidos live in the UK at the address they indicated, as they are currently in the UK no possibility of their interference with the production of evidence, or its acquisition, conservation or veracity can be seen and finally, taking into account their current place of residence, there is no risk for the disturbance of public order and tranquillity."

Was that anything more than signing a form re identity and habitual residence?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: John on December 19, 2017, 02:38:58 AM
The question given was whether or not Kate was right not to answer the forty eight questions presented to her as an arguida ... and the answer must be, that of course she was.
In my opinion anything at all would have sufficed to give the police their excuse to lock her up and metaphorically speaking lock up any possibility with her that Madeleine had, of someone who cared enough about her to keep on searching for the living breathing child she may be.

The police had given up on that as the cites I included in my previous post prove.  They decided in the golden hours of her disappearance that she was dead and they also decided exactly who was responsible and apart from a small detour via Murat they held to that throughout.

An investigation relying on a dream is not in my opinion credible.  An investigation which is incapable of understanding forensic evidence is not in my opinion fit for purpose ... there simply is no excuse for it.

In my opinion Kate used the only defence her daughter had to be looked for and that was her silence.  As it was until she got the ear of the then home secretary Alan Johnson in 2010 only she and Gerry had been fighting in Madeleine's corner and on many fronts.
The fact they had to take on all comers to achieve what they did is probably one of the most distasteful episodes imaginable. But achieve it they did ... and all credit to them for doing so and it started when Kate kept herself out of jail when as an arguida she exercised her rights ... good on her!

Lets have a look at the questions.

The questions Kate McCann refused point blank to answer were:

1 On May 3, 2007, around 22:00, when you entered the apartment, what did you see? What did you do? Where did you look? What did you touch?

2 Did you search inside the master bedroom wardrobe?

3 (Shown two photographs of her bedroom wardrobe) Can you describe its contents?

4 Why was the curtain by the sofa near the side window tampered with? Did someone go behind the sofa?

5 How long did your search of the apartment take after you detected Madeleine’s disappearance?

6 Why did you say Madeleine had been abducted?

7 Assuming Madeleine was abducted, why did you leave the twins to go to the ‘Tapas’ and raise the alarm? The supposed abductor could still be in the apartment.

8 Why didn’t you ask the twins then what happened to their sister or why didn’t you ask them later on?

9 When you raised the alarm at the ‘Tapas’ what exactly did you say – what were your exact words?

10 What happened after you raised the alarm there?

11 Why did you go and warn your friends instead of shouting from the verandah?

12 Who contacted the authorities?

13 Who took place in the searches?

14 Did anyone outside the group learn of her disappearance in those following minutes?

15 Did any neighbour offer you help?

16 What does “we let her down” mean?

17 Did Jane Tanner tell you that night she’d seen a man with a child?

18 How were the authorities contacted and which police force was alerted?

19 During the searches, with the police there, where did you search for Maddie, how and in what way?

20 Why did the twins not wake up during that search or when they were taken upstairs?

21 Who did you phone after the occurrence?

22 Did you call Sky News?

23 Did you know the danger of calling the media, because it could influence the abductor?

24 Did you ask for a priest?

25 By what means did you divulge Madeleine’s features, by photographs or by any other means?

26 Is it true that during the searches you remained seated on Maddie’s bed without moving?

27 What was your behaviour that night?

28 Did you manage to sleep?

29 Before travelling to Portugal, did you make any comment about a foreboding or a bad feeling?

30 What was Madeleine’s behaviour like?

31 Did Maddie suffer from any illness or take any medication?

32 What was Madeleine’s relationship like with her brother and sister?

33 What was Madeleine’s relationship like with her brother and sister, friends and school mates?

34 As for your professional life, in how many and which hospitals have you worked?

35 What is your medical speciality?

36 Have you ever done shift work in any emergency services or other services?

37 Did you work every day?

38 At a certain point you stopped working. Why?

39 Are the twins difficult to get to sleep? Are they restless and does that cause you uneasiness?

40 Is it true sometimes you despaired at your children’s behaviour and it left you feeling very uneasy?

41 Is it true that in England you even considered handing over Madeleine’s custody to a relative?

42 In England, did you medicate your children? What type of medication?

43 In the case files, you were shown canine forensic testing films. After watching them, did you say you couldn't explain any more than you already had?

44 When the sniffer dog also marked human blood behind the sofa, did you say you couldn’t explain any more than you already had?

45 When the sniffer dog marked the scent of corpse coming from the vehicle you hired a month after the disappearance, did you say you couldn’t explain any more than you already had?

46 When human blood was marked in the boot of the vehicle, did you say you couldn’t explain any more than you already had?

47 When confronted with the results of Maddie’s DNA, carried out in a British lab, collected from behind the sofa and the boot of the vehicle, did you say you couldn’t explain any more than you already had?

48 Did you have any responsibility or intervention in your daughter’s disappearance?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: John on December 19, 2017, 02:48:00 AM
To the reader these questions appear totally innocuous so imo could not be seen as incriminatory.  In line with tried and tested police practice, these questions were carefully tailored in order to provoke a reaction and that reaction was 48 replies of "No comment".  For any detective, such a response would set alarm bells a ringing and would be suggestive that further investigatory opportunities were necessary.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Brietta on December 19, 2017, 02:57:40 AM
Lets have a look at the questions.

The questions Kate McCann refused point blank to answer were:

1 On May 3, 2007, around 22:00, when you entered the apartment, what did you see? What did you do? Where did you look? What did you touch?

2 Did you search inside the master bedroom wardrobe?

3 (Shown two photographs of her bedroom wardrobe) Can you describe its contents?

4 Why was the curtain by the sofa near the side window tampered with? Did someone go behind the sofa?

5 How long did your search of the apartment take after you detected Madeleine’s disappearance?

6 Why did you say Madeleine had been abducted?

7 Assuming Madeleine was abducted, why did you leave the twins to go to the ‘Tapas’ and raise the alarm? The supposed abductor could still be in the apartment.

8 Why didn’t you ask the twins then what happened to their sister or why didn’t you ask them later on?

9 When you raised the alarm at the ‘Tapas’ what exactly did you say – what were your exact words?

10 What happened after you raised the alarm there?

11 Why did you go and warn your friends instead of shouting from the verandah?

12 Who contacted the authorities?

13 Who took place in the searches?

14 Did anyone outside the group learn of her disappearance in those following minutes?

15 Did any neighbour offer you help?

16 What does “we let her down” mean?

17 Did Jane Tanner tell you that night she’d seen a man with a child?

18 How were the authorities contacted and which police force was alerted?

19 During the searches, with the police there, where did you search for Maddie, how and in what way?

20 Why did the twins not wake up during that search or when they were taken upstairs?

21 Who did you phone after the occurrence?

22 Did you call Sky News?

23 Did you know the danger of calling the media, because it could influence the abductor?

24 Did you ask for a priest?

25 By what means did you divulge Madeleine’s features, by photographs or by any other means?

26 Is it true that during the searches you remained seated on Maddie’s bed without moving?

27 What was your behaviour that night?

28 Did you manage to sleep?

29 Before travelling to Portugal, did you make any comment about a foreboding or a bad feeling?

30 What was Madeleine’s behaviour like?

31 Did Maddie suffer from any illness or take any medication?

32 What was Madeleine’s relationship like with her brother and sister?

33 What was Madeleine’s relationship like with her brother and sister, friends and school mates?

34 As for your professional life, in how many and which hospitals have you worked?

35 What is your medical speciality?

36 Have you ever done shift work in any emergency services or other services?

37 Did you work every day?

38 At a certain point you stopped working. Why?

39 Are the twins difficult to get to sleep? Are they restless and does that cause you uneasiness?

40 Is it true sometimes you despaired at your children’s behaviour and it left you feeling very uneasy?

41 Is it true that in England you even considered handing over Madeleine’s custody to a relative?

42 In England, did you medicate your children? What type of medication?

43 In the case files, you were shown canine forensic testing films. After watching them, did you say you couldn't explain any more than you already had?

44 When the sniffer dog also marked human blood behind the sofa, did you say you couldn’t explain any more than you already had?

45 When the sniffer dog marked the scent of corpse coming from the vehicle you hired a month after the disappearance, did you say you couldn’t explain any more than you already had?

46 When human blood was marked in the boot of the vehicle, did you say you couldn’t explain any more than you already had?

47 When confronted with the results of Maddie’s DNA, carried out in a British lab, collected from behind the sofa and the boot of the vehicle, did you say you couldn’t explain any more than you already had?

48 Did you have any responsibility or intervention in your daughter’s disappearance?

Kate had undergone exhaustive sessions being interrogated by the PJ ... I'm certain she must have answered all the questions already asked ... and I think the proof of that is: ...

43 In the case files, you were shown canine forensic testing films. After watching them, did you say you couldn't explain any more than you already had?

44 When the sniffer dog also marked human blood behind the sofa, did you say you couldn’t explain any more than you already had?

45 When the sniffer dog marked the scent of corpse coming from the vehicle you hired a month after the disappearance, did you say you couldn’t explain any more than you already had?

46 When human blood was marked in the boot of the vehicle, did you say you couldn’t explain any more than you already had?

47 When confronted with the results of Maddie’s DNA, carried out in a British lab, collected from behind the sofa and the boot of the vehicle, did you say you couldn’t explain any more than you already had?


She had already been asked these questions as a witness ... who knows, maybe her answers were considered inadequate and caused her to be constituted arguida.

The fact they were asked again is proof positive to me that the investigation really believed the script they had ... they truly just did not appreciate what the FSS report was telling them and they had got it badly wrong.
That is really shocking: if they didn't fully understand the forensics there were plenty of expert scientists in Portugal who could have explained it to them ... I don't think they could have been asked.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: John on December 19, 2017, 03:02:41 AM
We don't know what the FSS were telling the Portuguese initially since it appears to have changed by the time the final forensic report appeared.  The Portuguese police cannot be blamed for the shortcomings of the now defunct FSS.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Brietta on December 19, 2017, 03:59:46 AM
We don't know what the FSS were telling the Portuguese initially since it appears to have changed by the time the final forensic report appeared.  The Portuguese police cannot be blamed for the shortcomings of the now defunct FSS.

There was nothing wrong with the FSS report and it was most definitely to hand during the arguido interviews.  The PJ either did not want to understand the final result or they did and ignored it in their eagerness to extract a confession.

Kate says in her book: "When Gerry asked to see the DNA report, Ricardo became quite flustered, waving PC Grime’s document in the air and saying, ‘It is the dogs that are important!’"

That is so wrong on two points.
Alipio Ribeiro, national director of the Policia Judiciaria said in a radio interview there was a “certain hastiness” in making the McCanns suspects.

I think he was right ... and I think the whole episode may have contributed to Amaral's ultimate sacking from the case ... it must have been a huge embarrassment when the 'evidence' the PJ thought they had was wrong because the forensics just had not been understood.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: stephen25000 on December 19, 2017, 07:50:10 AM
The question given was whether or not Kate was right not to answer the forty eight questions presented to her as an arguida ... and the answer must be, that of course she was.
In my opinion anything at all would have sufficed to give the police their excuse to lock her up and metaphorically speaking lock up any possibility with her that Madeleine had, of someone who cared enough about her to keep on searching for the living breathing child she may be.

The police had given up on that as the cites I included in my previous post prove.  They decided in the golden hours of her disappearance that she was dead and they also decided exactly who was responsible and apart from a small detour via Murat they held to that throughout.

An investigation relying on a dream is not in my opinion credible.  An investigation which is incapable of understanding forensic evidence is not in my opinion fit for purpose ... there simply is no excuse for it.

In my opinion Kate used the only defence her daughter had to be looked for and that was her silence.  As it was until she got the ear of the then home secretary Alan Johnson in 2010 only she and Gerry had been fighting in Madeleine's corner and on many fronts.
The fact they had to take on all comers to achieve what they did is probably one of the most distasteful episodes imaginable. But achieve it they did ... and all credit to them for doing so and it started when Kate kept herself out of jail when as an arguida she exercised her rights ... good on her!

'...good on her...'  ?

Why  ?


Who else is to blame for their predicament ?

Why do people some people seem unable to take responsibility for their own actions and let others sort the mess they created ?


Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 19, 2017, 07:58:01 AM
'...good on her...'  ?

Why  ?


Who else is to blame for their predicament ?

Why do people some people seem unable to take responsibility for their own actions and let others sort the mess they created ?

the mccanns are not wholly responsible for this mess ...imo....plus many people  do not take responsibilty for their own actions and society has to step in to help. As a Doctor Gerry treats many patients who have contributed to their own illness
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Benice on December 19, 2017, 08:35:50 AM
I think from the outset, like now.

Reputation etc etc has always been at the forefront for the mccanns.

If only as much care had been put into looking after maddie, instead of themselves

Its always been about them, even now.

He answered questions, she didn't. always a plan to safeguard themselves.

all the above post IMO

On the contrary IMO it is sceptics who have made it ''all about them''.     Faced with no evidence against them  - every facial expression, every word they speak, every step they take, in fact every single last little thing they do is leapt upon and dissected over and over again with the sole aim of proving what 'nasty evil' people they are and so it must be them wotdunnit.    There are forums full of people making it 'all about the McCanns' on a personal level day in day out even now.
 
As for them conspiring together and deciding that Gerry would answer questions and Kate wouldn't.    Then once again - a favourite claim by sceptics  (and also Amaral)  imo.      i.e  When all else fails, just claim a conspiracy.

All in my opinion.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Eleanor on December 19, 2017, 08:41:18 AM

What I would like to know is what happens if a Witness refuses to answer questions.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Robittybob1 on December 19, 2017, 08:55:01 AM
What I would like to know is what happens if a Witness refuses to answer questions.
They just have to say "I can't remember".
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: G-Unit on December 19, 2017, 09:13:43 AM
People seem to be arguing this point using the benefit of hindsight; i.e. saying she was right because the questions were deceitful, repeats, irrelevant and so on.

Kate made her decision without the benefit of knowing what questions were going to asked, so they had no bearing on it.

She took the advice of her lawyer to stay silent. He clearly thought she might make her situation worse if she spoke.

Gerry had different advice when he rang Bob Small. 'Just tell them the truth' he said [madeleine].

Kate doesn't specifically tell us that their lawyer advised Gerry to be silent but either way he followed Bob Small's advice and answered.

I think Kate McCann was right to take her lawyer's advice in order to protect herself.

Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Benice on December 19, 2017, 10:27:56 AM
People seem to be arguing this point using the benefit of hindsight; i.e. saying she was right because the questions were deceitful, repeats, irrelevant and so on.

Kate made her decision without the benefit of knowing what questions were going to asked, so they had no bearing on it.

She took the advice of her lawyer to stay silent. He clearly thought she might make her situation worse if she spoke.

Gerry had different advice when he rang Bob Small. 'Just tell them the truth' he said [madeleine].

Kate doesn't specifically tell us that their lawyer advised Gerry to be silent but either way he followed Bob Small's advice and answered.

I think Kate McCann was right to take her lawyer's advice in order to protect herself. As a more volatile person than her husband she could well have made her situation worse had she spoken.


IMO Kate's lawyer had been persuaded by the PJ that the case they had against her was much stronger than it actually was- and that influenced his advice to her.  In view of that he decided to take no chances - which IMO was the correct thing to do and his advice to remain silent had nothing to do with her 'volatility' but was based purely on what he believed to be the situation at the time.  IMO

AIMHO


Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: kizzy on December 19, 2017, 12:26:05 PM
On the contrary IMO it is sceptics who have made it ''all about them''.     Faced with no evidence against them  - every facial expression, every word they speak, every step they take, in fact every single last little thing they do is leapt upon and dissected over and over again with the sole aim of proving what 'nasty evil' people they are and so it must be them wotdunnit.    There are forums full of people making it 'all about the McCanns' on a personal level day in day out even now.
 
As for them conspiring together and deciding that Gerry would answer questions and Kate wouldn't.    Then once again - a favourite claim by sceptics  (and also Amaral)  imo.      i.e  When all else fails, just claim a conspiracy.

All in my opinion.


It is about them, who was she thinking of by not answering the questions.

What ever anyone knows about this case,whether an abundance of knowledge or small amount.

It goes back to the beginning, nothing has been proved. whether they were involved or not.

They were not cleared of involvement.

IMO
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: kizzy on December 19, 2017, 12:52:06 PM


What leads you to believe that those of us who believe in innocent until proven otherwise, are not on "Madeleine's side"
Can you give examples to prove this?

Can you give examples, proving otherwise.

Do you think she should have answered the questions, for maddie's sake.

We don't have to prove maddies innocence do we, or what she suffered.

MY POST IS imo
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: jassi on December 19, 2017, 01:00:13 PM
I have never understood what was so contentious about any of  these questions that she refused to answer them .
She must have decided in advance to be uncooperative.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Brietta on December 19, 2017, 01:09:07 PM
People seem to be arguing this point using the benefit of hindsight; i.e. saying she was right because the questions were deceitful, repeats, irrelevant and so on.

Kate made her decision without the benefit of knowing what questions were going to asked, so they had no bearing on it.

She took the advice of her lawyer to stay silent. He clearly thought she might make her situation worse if she spoke.

Gerry had different advice when he rang Bob Small. 'Just tell them the truth' he said [madeleine].

Kate doesn't specifically tell us that their lawyer advised Gerry to be silent but either way he followed Bob Small's advice and answered.

I think Kate McCann was right to take her lawyer's advice in order to protect herself. As a more volatile person than her husband she could well have made her situation worse had she spoken.

Kate had already answered the questions asked on previous occasions but in my opinion, in accordance with the Portuguese Penal Code the answers could not be used against her because she had not been in effect "read her rights" ~ she had to be an arguida for that. 

In my opinion you are entirely wrong about 'hindsight'.

In her book, detailed experiencing this in real time and in real life and made her intelligent analysis of the situation as it affected her and Madeleine's separate cases at the time which in my opinion gave her the resolve not to indulge in providing hostages to fortune against them both.

In my opinion it was the correct thing to do under the circumstances at the time.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: jassi on December 19, 2017, 01:12:16 PM
Kate had already answered the questions asked on previous occasions but in my opinion, in accordance with the Portuguese Penal Code the answers could not be used against her because she had not been in effect "read her rights" ~ she had to be an arguida for that. 

In my opinion you are entirely wrong about 'hindsight'.

In her book, detailed experiencing this in real time and in real life and made her intelligent analysis of the situation as it affected her and Madeleine's separate cases at the time which in my opinion gave her the resolve not to indulge in providing hostages to fortune against them both.

In my opinion it was the correct thing to do under the circumstances at the time.

Do we know that for sure? Have we seen the answers she gave?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Brietta on December 19, 2017, 01:12:23 PM
I have never understood what was so contentious about any of  these questions that she refused to answer them .
She must have decided in advance to be uncooperative.

Read John's informative posts on the subject of questioning a suspect ... bearing in mind his first hand and therefore expert opinion from the policing angle.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Brietta on December 19, 2017, 01:16:56 PM
Do we know that for sure? Have we seen the answers she gave?

Yes we know it for sure as far as some of the questions are concerned.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: jassi on December 19, 2017, 01:18:04 PM
Yes we know it for sure as far as some of the questions are concerned.

Only some?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Brietta on December 19, 2017, 01:27:48 PM
Only some?

Proof positive for 'only some' ... what may have been asked of her at the marathon questioning session immediately prior to her arguido questioning might have been incompetently handled leading to them forgetting to ask all the important stuff they later put to her.

So how about actually indulging in expressing an opinion and leave the niggling one liners to others who are incapable of doing that ... when you do, you actually come up with posts which are worth something and contribute to the forum.  imo of course
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: jassi on December 19, 2017, 01:31:50 PM
Proof positive for 'only some' ... what may have been asked of her at the marathon questioning session immediately prior to her arguido questioning might have been incompetently handled leading to them forgetting to ask all the important stuff they later put to her.

So how about actually indulging in expressing an opinion and leave the niggling one liners to others who are incapable of doing that ... when you do, you actually come up with posts which are worth something and contribute to the forum.  imo of course

Am I not entitled to ask questions ?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: pathfinder73 on December 19, 2017, 02:20:23 PM
Proof positive for 'only some' ... what may have been asked of her at the marathon questioning session immediately prior to her arguido questioning might have been incompetently handled leading to them forgetting to ask all the important stuff they later put to her.

So how about actually indulging in expressing an opinion and leave the niggling one liners to others who are incapable of doing that ... when you do, you actually come up with posts which are worth something and contribute to the forum.  imo of course

The day before they never asked her any questions about the disappearance. These questions were asked the next day as an arguido but she refused to answer them. Here's the one she answered - pathetic!

Q.  Are you aware that in not answering the questions you are jeopardising the investigation, which seeks to discover what happened to your daughter?

KM.  'Yes, if that’s what the investigation thinks.'

Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on December 19, 2017, 02:35:19 PM
Kate had already answered the questions asked on previous occasions but in my opinion, in accordance with the Portuguese Penal Code the answers could not be used against her because she had not been in effect "read her rights" ~ she had to be an arguida for that. 

In my opinion you are entirely wrong about 'hindsight'.

In her book, detailed experiencing this in real time and in real life and made her intelligent analysis of the situation as it affected her and Madeleine's separate cases at the time which in my opinion gave her the resolve not to indulge in providing hostages to fortune against them both.

In my opinion it was the correct thing to do under the circumstances at the time.
That's not how it went, according to the PJ Files.

That's not how it went, according to Kate's book 'madeleine', p246 onwards in hardback.

Arguida first, then the 48 questions.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 19, 2017, 02:41:22 PM
If these questions were so important why did the pj wait 4 months to ask them
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Brietta on December 19, 2017, 02:55:56 PM
The day before they never asked her any questions about the disappearance. These questions were asked the next day as an arguido but she refused to answer them. Here's the one she answered - pathetic!

Q.  Are you aware that in not answering the questions you are jeopardising the investigation, which seeks to discover what happened to your daughter?

KM.  'Yes, if that’s what the investigation thinks.'

You are wrong.  Kate was asked about Madeleine's disappearance ... unless you suggest the misunderstood forensic results bore no relevance in the eyes of the PJ to what happened to Madeleine.


46   When the presence of human blood was signalled in the boot of the same vehicle Kate McCann said she could not explain anything more than she already had.

47   Confronted with the result of the sample of Madeleine's DNA, whose analysis was carried out by a British laboratory, found behind the sofa and in the boot of the vehicle, as previously described, Kate McCann said she could not explain anything more than she already had.

48   Did you have any responsibility or involvement in the disappearance of your daughter Madeleine?

49   Are you aware that the fact of your not answering the questions put to you jeopardise the investigation that was aimed at finding out what happened to your daughter, she answered: "Yes, if the investigation thinks that." http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7542939.stm

I think the question which is the clincher as far as the direction in which the PJ had been taking the investigation until stopped in their tracks by Kate's adherence to her legal advice is:
48   Did you have any responsibility or involvement in the disappearance of your daughter Madeleine?

The PJ were not looking for Madeleine ... their objective was nailing the arguida, Kate ... and there are those who purport to think she should have given up on Madeleine and acquiesced to that?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Brietta on December 19, 2017, 03:07:10 PM
That's not how it went, according to the PJ Files.

That's not how it went, according to Kate's book 'madeleine', p246 onwards in hardback.

Arguida first, then the 48 questions.
Thursday 6th September 2007
Portuguese police start interviewing Kate McCann, as a witness, in the presence of her lawyer.
 
Gerry states in his blog: 'The suggestion that Kate is involved in Madeleine's disappearance is ludicrous. Anyone who knows anything about the 3rd May knows that Kate is completely innocent. We will fight this all the way and will not stop looking for Madeleine'.

Friday 07 September 2007
Kate McCann leaves the police station in the early hours of the morning after 11 hours of questioning. She is instructed to return for further questioning hours later.
 
Kate arrives for second session of questioning
 
Justine McGuiness gives an interview whilst Kate is being interviewed for the second time
 
John Corner, a close friend of the McCanns, describes how he is stunned by the way the enquiry is going. Interviewed whilst Kate was being interviewed for second time.
 
Watch BBC interview here
 
After shorter second interview, Kate is declared an official suspect, 'arguida', in the disappearance of her daughter.
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id29.htm
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Carana on December 19, 2017, 03:52:57 PM
Thursday 6th September 2007
Portuguese police start interviewing Kate McCann, as a witness, in the presence of her lawyer.
 
Gerry states in his blog: 'The suggestion that Kate is involved in Madeleine's disappearance is ludicrous. Anyone who knows anything about the 3rd May knows that Kate is completely innocent. We will fight this all the way and will not stop looking for Madeleine'.

Friday 07 September 2007
Kate McCann leaves the police station in the early hours of the morning after 11 hours of questioning. She is instructed to return for further questioning hours later.
 
Kate arrives for second session of questioning
 
Justine McGuiness gives an interview whilst Kate is being interviewed for the second time
 
John Corner, a close friend of the McCanns, describes how he is stunned by the way the enquiry is going. Interviewed whilst Kate was being interviewed for second time.
 
Watch BBC interview here
 
After shorter second interview, Kate is declared an official suspect, 'arguida', in the disappearance of her daughter.
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id29.htm


Looking at the files,

On 6 Sept, her witness interview began at 3pm and ended at 11 pm and she was to go back the next day.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/Processopdf10page41Kateinterrogatio.jpg
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/Processopdf10page50Kateinterrogatio.jpg

On 7 May, the arguida interview started at 11 am and ended at 2:30 pm.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P10/10VOLUME_Xa_Page_2557.jpg
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P10/10VOLUME_Xa_Page_2560.jpg

I expect that there was some hanging around, and on 7th, there would have been going through the arguido status thing.

If there were any left over bits to finish the next day, but prior to arguida time, I can't see anything in the files.

Of interest, is that the arguido statement appears to have been signed by the interpreter, whereas the witness ones don't (unless I've missed them).
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Robittybob1 on December 19, 2017, 05:20:40 PM
Thursday 6th September 2007
Portuguese police start interviewing Kate McCann, as a witness, in the presence of her lawyer.
 
Gerry states in his blog: 'The suggestion that Kate is involved in Madeleine's disappearance is ludicrous. Anyone who knows anything about the 3rd May knows that Kate is completely innocent. We will fight this all the way and will not stop looking for Madeleine'.

Friday 07 September 2007
Kate McCann leaves the police station in the early hours of the morning after 11 hours of questioning. She is instructed to return for further questioning hours later.
 
Kate arrives for second session of questioning
 
Justine McGuiness gives an interview whilst Kate is being interviewed for the second time
 
John Corner, a close friend of the McCanns, describes how he is stunned by the way the enquiry is going. Interviewed whilst Kate was being interviewed for second time.
 
Watch BBC interview here
 
After shorter second interview, Kate is declared an official suspect, 'arguida', in the disappearance of her daughter.
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id29.htm

From a procedural aspect did Kate and Gerry know the were going to be made arguidos prior to the questioning.  Like as we've discussed if she was being interviewed as a witness she was not allowed to not answer, but if she was an arguido she didn't have to answer and she was allowed to have a lawyer present. 

The whole process get tricky as we discussed recently the PJ keep a person as a witness as long as possible so they can ask questions without a lawyer present. 

I know it was announced to the public that K and G were made arguidos but when did they get told themselves?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: John on December 19, 2017, 09:27:59 PM
In my opinion the fact that one risible 'explanation' heaped one upon the other was put forward in explanation weakens any case being made.
Before my time ... but still dragged out from time to time for an airing ... was the blue sports bag; Amaral had to make do with a studio background of Gerry and a golf bag to illustrate that one: I seem to remember one suggestion that Madeleine's body had been smuggled out of Portugal in a diplomatic bag: then there was "the clone" and so it goes on.
But in my opinion not one of them has really played to the gallery as much as the paroxysms of naked hatred aimed at the woman who refused to 'co-operate' with the police in her missing daughter's case; totally disregarding the fact that it had nothing to do with advancing Madeleine's inquiry but was all about 'solving' her case by incriminating her mother.

If that had succeeded that would have been the end of any further questions being asked on Madeleine's behalf ... and there is precedent which supports that opinion.

I agree with you that some of the theories which have been espoused over the last ten years are indeed risible.  But back to the subject of the topic, the unanswered 48 questions. Kate McCann had the opportunity to set the record straight but for some reason she chose not to confront the PJ head on.  I have long wondered if she had known then that her responses would be made known to the public at large, would she still have refused to answer?

I firmly believe she did enormous damage to her credibility by refusing to give simple straightforward answers to what were really basic questions.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: jassi on December 19, 2017, 09:44:56 PM
Perhaps as a sort of festive quiz we could try and match the 48 questions to the answers she is supposed to have already given.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: G-Unit on December 19, 2017, 09:57:30 PM
I agree with you that some of the theories which have been espoused over the last ten years are indeed risible.  But back to the subject of the topic, the unanswered 48 questions. Kate McCann had the opportunity to set the record straight but for some reason she chose not to confront the PJ head on.  I have long wondered if she had known then that her responses would be made known to the public at large, would she still have refused to answer?

I firmly believe she did enormous damage to her credibility by refusing to give simple straightforward answers to what were really basic questions.

There was one very interesting question too;

41   Is it true or not that in England you went so far as thinking about handing over Madeleine to a relative to look after?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7542939.stm

Answering that question would have been very difficult in my opinion as it suggests the PJ knew what the correct answer was.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 19, 2017, 10:01:01 PM
I agree with you that some of the theories which have been espoused over the last ten years are indeed risible.  But back to the subject of the topic, the unanswered 48 questions. Kate McCann had the opportunity to set the record straight but for some reason she chose not to confront the PJ head on.  I have long wondered if she had known then that her responses would be made known to the public at large, would she still have refused to answer?

I firmly believe she did enormous damage to her credibility by refusing to give simple straightforward answers to what were really basic questions.

I would say most of the uk public dont have a clue about the 48 questions....of thos who do as we ahve seen some support and some dont...im impressed with G for saying she understands why kate didnt answer them.

There is really just opinion on this topic...its a shame we dont have so reel professional opinion...if we did I feel it would support Kate
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 19, 2017, 10:02:00 PM
There was one very interesting question too;

41   Is it true or not that in England you went so far as thinking about handing over Madeleine to a relative to look after?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7542939.stm

Answering that question would have been very difficult in my opinion because the fact that it was asked suggests the PJ knew what the correct answer was.

I doubt that has any truth in it at all
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: G-Unit on December 19, 2017, 10:10:40 PM
Perhaps as a sort of festive quiz we could try and match the 48 questions to the answers she is supposed to have already given.

Question 1. Which answer would she have given do you think?

1   On 3 May 2007 at around 2200, when you entered the apartment what did you see and do, where did you look, and what did you touch?

She noticed that the door to her children's bedroom was completely open, the window was also open, the shutters raised and the curtains open, while she was certain of having closed them all as she always did.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/KATE-MCCANN.htm

As I ran back into the children’s room the closed curtains flew up in a gust of wind [madeleine]
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 19, 2017, 10:13:51 PM
Question 1. Which answer would she have given do you think?

1   On 3 May 2007 at around 2200, when you entered the apartment what did you see and do, where did you look, and what did you touch?

She noticed that the door to her children's bedroom was completely open, the window was also open, the shutters raised and the curtains open, while she was certain of having closed them all as she always did.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/KATE-MCCANN.htm

As I ran back into the children’s room the closed curtains flew up in a gust of wind [madeleine]

I dont really see the point in such pointless speculation
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: John on December 19, 2017, 10:14:00 PM
There was one very interesting question too;

41   Is it true or not that in England you went so far as thinking about handing over Madeleine to a relative to look after?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7542939.stm

Answering that question would have been very difficult in my opinion as it suggests the PJ knew what the correct answer was.

The answer was a simple yes or no.  A yes however could have been perfectly acceptable with a qualification.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 19, 2017, 10:15:11 PM
The answer was a simple yes or no.

and she was advised not to answer any questions by her lawyer...she did the right thing..imo
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: G-Unit on December 19, 2017, 10:22:24 PM
I doubt that has any truth in it at all

In my opinion it's not the kind of question you ask the mother of a missing child unless you have good reason to believe it's true.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: John on December 19, 2017, 10:24:16 PM
and she was advised not to answer any questions by her lawyer...she did the right thing..imo

She did if she wanted to look guilty in the eyes of the police.   People with absolutely nothing to hide just don't act like that imo.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 19, 2017, 10:29:38 PM
She did if she wanted to look guilty in the eyes of the police.   People with absolutely nothing to hide just don't act like that imo.

she was already guilty in th eyes of the police because they misunderstood the evidence..imo
colin stagg exercised his right to silence when he felt the police were going to charge him with a crime he was innocent of

Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: John on December 19, 2017, 10:31:32 PM
she was already guilty in th eyes of the police because they misunderstood the evidence..imo
colin stagg exercised his right to silence when he felt the police were going to charge him with a crime he was innocent of

In that case she should definitely have answered all the questions put to her and put an end to it there and then.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 19, 2017, 10:34:52 PM
In that case she should definitely have answered all the questions put to her and put an end to it there and then.

in your opinion...not in mine...imo had kate answerred those 48 there would have been another 48...the only way to stop the farce,,,imo was to stay silent...she was right to do so imo.

The important point is not why did kate not answer but why her lawyer advised her not to answer
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Carana on December 19, 2017, 10:37:32 PM
There was one very interesting question too;

41   Is it true or not that in England you went so far as thinking about handing over Madeleine to a relative to look after?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7542939.stm

Answering that question would have been very difficult in my opinion as it suggests the PJ knew what the correct answer was.

IMO, the most logical reason is that the PJ had found out that they'd applied to the Family Court, and assumed it was over an adoption issue.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: G-Unit on December 19, 2017, 10:37:59 PM
The answer was a simple yes or no.  A yes however could have been perfectly acceptable with a qualification.

I agree, a yes with an explanation could have been acceptable. Many mothers have moments when they wish their kids were elsewhere, it's just a moment.

The problem for Kate would have been the picture of her which had been presented by her friends and relatives. They described her as a calm organised mother who, with her husband's support had her children perfectly organised. Her eldest daughter was precious, pampered and adored.

It would suggest that she had managed to conceal her moments of desperation and inadequacy from all those who knew her.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 19, 2017, 10:39:58 PM
I agree, a yes with an explanation could have been acceptable. Many mothers have moments when they wish their kids were elsewhere, it's just a moment.

The problem for Kate would have been the picture of her which had been presented by her friends and relatives. They described her as a calm organised mother who, with her husband's support had her children perfectly organised. Her eldest daughter was precious, pampered and adored.

It would suggest that she had managed to conceal her moments of desperation and inadequacy from all those who knew her.
so what you are saying is taht the answers to the questions could have been misinterpreted so kate was absolutely right to remain silent
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: G-Unit on December 19, 2017, 10:49:14 PM
so what you are saying is taht the answers to the questions could have been misinterpreted so kate was absolutely right to remain silent

Which was also open to interpretation as we have seen. The advice she was given was for her own protection and she took it. Some seem to be saying that helping the investigation into her daughter's disappearance should have been her priority, not protecting herself.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 19, 2017, 10:52:51 PM
Which was also open to interpretation as we have seen. The advice she was given was for her own protection and she took it. Some seem to be saying that helping the investigation into her daughter's disappearance should have been her priority, not protecting herself.

in your opinion...imo ..keeping her self out of prison where she would not help the search for maddie was far more important...carana made a similar post...its all opinion and Im surprised you cannot see taht ...Kate was absolutely right imo
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 19, 2017, 10:55:31 PM
is there any actual evidence against kate apart from taking her lawyers advice and going jogging
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: John on December 19, 2017, 11:01:52 PM
is there any actual evidence against kate apart from taking her lawyers advice and going jogging

Evidence of what?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 19, 2017, 11:02:54 PM
Evidence of what?

evidence of Kate hiding anything re maddies disappearance..
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Benice on December 20, 2017, 08:30:25 AM
IMO, the most logical reason is that the PJ had found out that they'd applied to the Family Court, and assumed it was over an adoption issue.

From memory so I could be wrong - but wasn't that question asked as the result of an article in a Portuguese newspaper making the claim?

Have searched but so far haven't been able to find anything.   Maybe someone else will remember.   

Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Benice on December 20, 2017, 08:57:11 AM
She did if she wanted to look guilty in the eyes of the police.   People with absolutely nothing to hide just don't act like that imo.

I'm amazed John that you would expect her to help the police to incriminate her.  Why would any innocent person do that?

IMO her lawyer had warned her that the PJ could choose to interpret anything she did say in any way they wished - so best to play safe and  not give them that chance.       And once again - in view of what the PJ regarded as vital 'evidence'  - (stuff which IMO would never have been considered as evidence at all by UK police - let alone vital evidence) - she was right to listen to her Portuguese lawyer who would be very familiar with how Portuguese policemen operated when it came to what constituted 'evidence' - and of which she knew nothing.

AIMHO


 
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 20, 2017, 09:24:37 AM
Anyone seen...my cousin Vinny....where being interviewed the young suspect says....I shot the clerk.....
See how an innocent suspect could incriminate themselves... particularly the way the interview was translated

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=you+tube+my+cousin+vinny+i+shot+the+clerk&view=detail&mid=58F4825C1780ED6A826E58F4825C1780ED6A826E&FORM=VIRE
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Benice on December 20, 2017, 09:32:21 AM
Can you give examples, proving otherwise.

Do you think she should have answered the questions, for maddie's sake.

We don't have to prove maddies innocence do we, or what she suffered.

MY POST IS imo

Have you actually read the 48 questions?     

How do you think that by not answering question 16 for instance jeopardised the investigation?

16. What does 'we let her down' mean?

UK police officers had been sitting alongside the PJ for months.  Instead of spending all that time wondering what it meant - all the PJ had to do was to ask one of them!   

What about question 24.    Did you ask for a priest?

Apparently in PT you only ask for a priest when someone has died.    That is not the case in this country.   A fact which the PJ could have very easily established from any number of reliable independent religious sources imo.

Once again - examples of how being a foreign country, with different cultures and not speaking the language  worked unfairly against the McCanns every step of the way.   Something which is never given even a tad of consideration by some sceptics IMO.

IMO -those 2 questions also indicate a jawdropping level of incompetence.

AIMHO
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on December 20, 2017, 09:44:27 AM
Have you actually read the 48 questions?     

How do you think that by not answering question 16 for instance jeopardised the investigation?

16. What does 'we let her down' mean?

UK police officers had been sitting alongside the PJ for months.  Instead of spending all that time wondering what it meant - all the PJ had to do was to ask one of them!   

What about question 24.    Did you ask for a priest?

Apparently in PT you only ask for a priest when someone has died.    That is not the case in this country.   A fact which the PJ could have very easily established from any number of reliable independent religious sources imo.

Once again - examples of how being a foreign country, with different cultures and not speaking the language  worked unfairly against the McCanns every step of the way.   Something which is never given even a tad of consideration by some sceptics IMO.

IMO -those 2 questions also indicate a jawdropping level of incompetence.

AIMHO
What is wrong with either question? The police were entitled to ask both.  Kate could have answered both.

For Madeleine's sake.

No stone unturned?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: stephen25000 on December 20, 2017, 09:50:58 AM
What is wrong with either question? The police were entitled to ask both.  Kate could have answered both.

For Madeleine's sake.

No stone unturned?

Indeed. SIL.

Wasn't one of the catchphrases leaving no stone upturned 8)-))).
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 20, 2017, 10:00:45 AM
What is wrong with either question? The police were entitled to ask both.  Kate could have answered both.

For Madeleine's sake.

No stone unturned?

Kate was right to refuse for obvious reasons imo
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: jassi on December 20, 2017, 10:06:23 AM
Indeed. SIL.

Wasn't one of the catchphrases leaving no stone upturned 8)-))).

Aye, but it was just a good marketing ploy, not something to be taken literally.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: stephen25000 on December 20, 2017, 10:12:33 AM
Aye, but it was just a good marketing ploy, not something to be taken literally.

Or was it ?

As long as everything went their way ? 8)-)))
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Benice on December 20, 2017, 10:20:30 AM
What is wrong with either question? The police were entitled to ask both.  Kate could have answered both.

For Madeleine's sake.

No stone unturned?

It was for Madeline's sake that she decided to listen to her Portuguese lawyers expert advice imo.

 No point in having a Portuguese lawyer who would know from experience what could happen if she replied - and then ignoring his advice - and certainly no point at all in helping the PJ to pin the crime on the wrong person.   That would have effectively brought the search for Madeline to an end IMO.   By taking her lawyers advice she protected her child from that possibility.

 I do not profess to know better than Kate's lawyer when it comes to his knowledge of Portuguese law and police interrogations and therefore have no criticism of his advice to her.    Anyone who thinks they do know better - and that he gave the wrong advice should explain why IMO.

AIMHO

Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: faithlilly on December 20, 2017, 11:02:07 AM
It was for Madeline's sake that she decided to listen to her Portuguese lawyers expert advice imo.

 No point in having a Portuguese lawyer who would know from experience what could happen if she replied - and then ignoring his advice - and certainly no point at all in helping the PJ to pin the crime on the wrong person.   That would have effectively brought the search for Madeline to an end IMO.   By taking her lawyers advice she protected her child from that possibility.

 I do not profess to know better than Kate's lawyer when it comes to his knowledge of Portuguese law and police interrogations and therefore have no criticism of his advice to her.    Anyone who thinks they do know better - and that he gave the wrong advice should explain why IMO.

AIMHO

Gerry would have been given the same advice. Are you saying that by answering the questions put to him he was facilitating the framing of himself or his wife and ultimately the end of the search for Madeleine because that's what you seem to e saying.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 20, 2017, 11:08:02 AM
Gerry would have been given the same advice. Are you saying that by answering the questions put to him he was facilitating the framing of himself or his wife and ultimately the end of the search for Madeleine because that's what you seem to e saying.

I would say he should have kept quiet for exactly those reasons
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Benice on December 20, 2017, 11:28:25 AM
Gerry would have been given the same advice. Are you saying that by answering the questions put to him he was facilitating the framing of himself or his wife and ultimately the end of the search for Madeleine because that's what you seem to e saying.

IMO Gerry was not in the frame.  So not so imperative that he took the advice.

On the other hand Kate was definitely in the frame IMO and her lawyer knew she was -   so it was imperative that she took her lawyers advice.

The alleged 'deal' offered to Kate was confirmation of that IMO.

AIMHO





Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: stephen25000 on December 20, 2017, 11:50:48 AM
IMO Gerry was not in the frame.  So not so imperative that he took the advice.

On the other hand Kate was definitely in the frame IMO and her lawyer knew she was -   so it was imperative that she took her lawyers advice.

The alleged 'deal' offered to Kate was confirmation of that IMO.

AIMHO

An alleged deal, illegal inPortuguese Law.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 20, 2017, 11:59:24 AM
Are you saying davel that has never occurred in Britain ?
Unfortunately there are bad apples everywhere
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Carana on December 20, 2017, 12:13:24 PM
From memory so I could be wrong - but wasn't that question asked as the result of an article in a Portuguese newspaper making the claim?

Have searched but so far haven't been able to find anything.   Maybe someone else will remember.


Possibly, Benice, as there were so many garbled "leaks" and it's now a long time ago.

A discussion on the issue (if the link is allowed) https://madeleinemccannthetruth.wordpress.com/2013/04/20/ward-of-court/
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Carana on December 20, 2017, 12:24:20 PM
What is wrong with either question? The police were entitled to ask both.  Kate could have answered both.

For Madeleine's sake.

No stone unturned?

SIL,

If someone selectively answers some questions, but not others... which do you think the police will concentrate on?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: jassi on December 20, 2017, 12:35:01 PM
SIL,

If someone selectively answers some questions, but not others... which do you think the police will concentrate on?

There doesn't seem any reason to answer selectively. as questions were straightforward
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: kizzy on December 20, 2017, 12:48:54 PM
Have you actually read the 48 questions?     

How do you think that by not answering question 16 for instance jeopardised the investigation?

16. What does 'we let her down' mean?

UK police officers had been sitting alongside the PJ for months.  Instead of spending all that time wondering what it meant - all the PJ had to do was to ask one of them!   

What about question 24.    Did you ask for a priest?

Apparently in PT you only ask for a priest when someone has died.    That is not the case in this country.   A fact which the PJ could have very easily established from any number of reliable independent religious sources imo.

Once again - examples of how being a foreign country, with different cultures and not speaking the language  worked unfairly against the McCanns every step of the way.   Something which is never given even a tad of consideration by some sceptics IMO.

IMO -those 2 questions also indicate a jawdropping level of incompetence.

AIMHO


Fgs so you want her wrapped in cotton wool, protected from the elements.

If they hadn't done what they did, she wouldn't have been sat there.

The least she could have done was answer the questions, helped the investigation.

Hypocritical don't you think they went after everyone suing them, who she thought harmed the investigation.

the above post is IMO
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: faithlilly on December 20, 2017, 12:53:39 PM
IMO Gerry was not in the frame.  So not so imperative that he took the advice.

On the other hand Kate was definitely in the frame IMO and her lawyer knew she was -   so it was imperative that she took her lawyers advice.

The alleged 'deal' offered to Kate was confirmation of that IMO.

AIMHO

Gerry was an arguido and it was obvious that if the abduction had been faked he was mostly definitely in the frame for some part in it. He would have known that yet still answered every question.

If Kate went down Gerry was going down too.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Carana on December 20, 2017, 12:53:52 PM
There doesn't seem any reason to answer selectively. as questions were straightforward

I have no doubt that you do, Jassi.

I see the set of questions differently.

The report submitted by Tavares de Almeida was despite the fact that she hadn't responded as an arguida.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TAVARES_ALMEIDA.htm
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Carana on December 20, 2017, 12:56:08 PM
Gerry was an arguido and it was obvious that if the abduction had been faked he was mostly definitely in the frame for some part in it. He would have known that yet still answered every question.

If Kate went down Gerry was going down too.

I agree with you on that, although perhaps for different reasons.

Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: faithlilly on December 20, 2017, 12:58:51 PM
I agree with you on that, although perhaps for different reasons.

And your reasons ?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: jassi on December 20, 2017, 01:26:41 PM
I have no doubt that you do, Jassi.

I see the set of questions differently.

The report submitted by Tavares de Almeida was despite the fact that she hadn't responded as an arguida.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TAVARES_ALMEIDA.htm

What drawbacks do you perceive in answering the questions ?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: slartibartfast on December 20, 2017, 03:36:04 PM
IMO Gerry was not in the frame.  So not so imperative that he took the advice.

On the other hand Kate was definitely in the frame IMO and her lawyer knew she was -   so it was imperative that she took her lawyers advice.

The alleged 'deal' offered to Kate was confirmation of that IMO.

AIMHO

Do you have the exact wording of the lawyers advice?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on December 20, 2017, 05:21:15 PM
What drawbacks do you perceive in answering the questions ?

As an arguida she could not incriminate herself anyway.
I wonder was she constituted arguida part way through an interview?

Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 20, 2017, 05:51:29 PM
As an arguida she could not incriminate herself anyway.
I wonder was she constituted arguida part way through an interview?

Of course she could incriminate herself
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on December 20, 2017, 06:37:34 PM
SIL,

If someone selectively answers some questions, but not others... which do you think the police will concentrate on?
If one of my young grandchildren went missing tonight.  And I was made a suspect.  I would answer all the questions truthfully.  For 2 reasons.

It is the quickest/easiest/most certain way to get the police to stop focusing on me.

But more importantly, it would get the police focusing on what happened to my grandchild.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 20, 2017, 07:30:14 PM
If one of my young grandchildren went missing tonight.  And I was made a suspect.  I would answer all the questions truthfully.  For 2 reasons.

It is the quickest/easiest/most certain way to get the police to stop focusing on me.

But more importantly, it would get the police focusing on what happened to my grandchild.

tHat is your opinion ...but Kate did what she thought was right and I and others...including her lawyer ,,,, think she did the right thing
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Carana on December 20, 2017, 07:43:53 PM
If one of my young grandchildren went missing tonight.  And I was made a suspect.  I would answer all the questions truthfully.  For 2 reasons.

It is the quickest/easiest/most certain way to get the police to stop focusing on me.

But more importantly, it would get the police focusing on what happened to my grandchild.

So did they, except for Kate's arguido interview several months later, following a never-ending media onslaught, and what seems to have been a somewhat disconcerting evening at the police station the night before, and what her lawyer apparently eventually advised her.



Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Robittybob1 on December 20, 2017, 08:48:16 PM
If one of my young grandchildren went missing tonight.  And I was made a suspect.  I would answer all the questions truthfully.  For 2 reasons.

It is the quickest/easiest/most certain way to get the police to stop focusing on me.

But more importantly, it would get the police focusing on what happened to my grandchild.
Easy said when it isn't real. 
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: jassi on December 20, 2017, 09:07:44 PM
Easy said when it isn't real.

Easy done when it is real. All down to strength of character.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Robittybob1 on December 20, 2017, 09:14:08 PM
Easy done when it is real. All down to strength of character.
Not if there is some embarrassing reason involved behind the scenes. 
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: jassi on December 20, 2017, 09:44:48 PM
Not if there is some embarrassing reason involved behind the scenes.

I'd have thought that in such circumstances, embarrassment would go out the window.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Robittybob1 on December 20, 2017, 11:18:33 PM
I'd have thought that in such circumstances, embarrassment would go out the window.
Not always, those 16 text messages Gerry received have been kept hush hush.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: sadie on December 20, 2017, 11:27:41 PM
Anyone seen...my cousin Vinny....where being interviewed the young suspect says....I shot the clerk.....
See how an innocent suspect could incriminate themselves... particularly the way the interview was translated

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=you+tube+my+cousin+vinny+i+shot+the+clerk&view=detail&mid=58F4825C1780ED6A826E58F4825C1780ED6A826E&FORM=VIRE


Fabulous illustration, Davel.

And i thought that I was the only one that got myself in scrapes like that!  *^&*
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: sadie on December 20, 2017, 11:41:19 PM
What is wrong with either question? The police were entitled to ask both.  Kate could have answered both.

For Madeleine's sake.

No stone unturned?
Neither of those questions would help find Madeleine.

Kate did right by taking her solicitors advice to answer none IMHO

Leonor Ciprianos partner Leandro Silva warned her about what happened to Leonor.   IMO and in the opinion of many she was stitched up.   

Black clothes so she had killed Joana, they said !  What rubbish, she was wearing bright red trousers as well, but that was not shown on the photos we saw at the time

So many silly things claimed against her, with no proof whatsoever.  What a fiasco!


Kate was absolutely right to take her solicitors advice.  The questions were not "finding Madeleine" questions, they were "trip you up" questions that when answered, could be twisted then misinterpreted. 

AIMHO
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: slartibartfast on December 20, 2017, 11:46:00 PM
Fabulous illustration, Davel.

And i thought that I was the only one that got myself in scrapes like that!  *^&*

It is improbable fiction.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 20, 2017, 11:48:30 PM
It is improbable fiction.

It shows how an innocent statement can be totally misconstrued
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on December 21, 2017, 12:01:12 AM
Anyone seen...my cousin Vinny....where being interviewed the young suspect says....I shot the clerk.....
See how an innocent suspect could incriminate themselves... particularly the way the interview was translated

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=you+tube+my+cousin+vinny+i+shot+the+clerk&view=detail&mid=58F4825C1780ED6A826E58F4825C1780ED6A826E&FORM=VIRE

Try a meaning for "Let him have it, Chris".
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: John on December 21, 2017, 12:32:41 AM
There was nothing wrong with the FSS report and it was most definitely to hand during the arguido interviews.  The PJ either did not want to understand the final result or they did and ignored it in their eagerness to extract a confession.

Kate says in her book: "When Gerry asked to see the DNA report, Ricardo became quite flustered, waving PC Grime’s document in the air and saying, ‘It is the dogs that are important!’"

That is so wrong on two points.
  • as an arguido, by law he was entitled to see the evidence against him ... he was denied that right
  • the dogs may have convinced the investigators ... but without forensics to back up the 'indications' that is all they were, 'indications' ... and as we saw from video shot in Jersey, Eddie was rather prone to indicate

Alipio Ribeiro, national director of the Policia Judiciaria said in a radio interview there was a “certain hastiness” in making the McCanns suspects.

I think he was right ... and I think the whole episode may have contributed to Amaral's ultimate sacking from the case ... it must have been a huge embarrassment when the 'evidence' the PJ thought they had was wrong because the forensics just had not been understood.

Apologies for going back on this but I picked up your reply while editing. 

We have no way of knowing what the British FSS were teling the Portuguese police pre final Report.  Amaral implies that what he was told initially differed from what eventually appeared in the Report.  If this is true then the FSS had some serious questions to answer.  Conveniently or not so, depending on ones position, the FSS were disbanded for other bad practises.

Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: John on December 21, 2017, 12:44:16 AM
You are wrong.  Kate was asked about Madeleine's disappearance ... unless you suggest the misunderstood forensic results bore no relevance in the eyes of the PJ to what happened to Madeleine.


46   When the presence of human blood was signalled in the boot of the same vehicle Kate McCann said she could not explain anything more than she already had.

47   Confronted with the result of the sample of Madeleine's DNA, whose analysis was carried out by a British laboratory, found behind the sofa and in the boot of the vehicle, as previously described, Kate McCann said she could not explain anything more than she already had.

48   Did you have any responsibility or involvement in the disappearance of your daughter Madeleine?

49   Are you aware that the fact of your not answering the questions put to you jeopardise the investigation that was aimed at finding out what happened to your daughter, she answered: "Yes, if the investigation thinks that." http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7542939.stm

I think the question which is the clincher as far as the direction in which the PJ had been taking the investigation until stopped in their tracks by Kate's adherence to her legal advice is:
48   Did you have any responsibility or involvement in the disappearance of your daughter Madeleine?

The PJ were not looking for Madeleine ... their objective was nailing the arguida, Kate ... and there are those who purport to think she should have given up on Madeleine and acquiesced to that?

I know that I am commenting with the hindsight of my own service but you must realise that it is the polices duty to investigate ALL possibilities and in the McCann case one of those possibilities was parental involvement.  They would have opened themselves up to great criticism had they not questioned the parents formally given everything which occurred.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 21, 2017, 12:45:48 AM
Apologies for going back on this but I picked up your reply while editing. 

We have no way of knowing what the British FSS were teling the Portuguese police pre final Report.  Amaral implies that what he was told initially differed from what eventually appeared in the Report.  If this is true then the FSS had some serious questions to answer.  Conveniently or not so, depending on ones position, the FSS were disbanded for other bad practises.

Complete speculation with no real evidence to support it...blaming the FSS for amarals inadequacies.....don't forget he completely misrepresented the dog alerts to ....would you suggest he was being fed false information here too...
All imo.....
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: John on December 21, 2017, 12:56:35 AM
If one of my young grandchildren went missing tonight.  And I was made a suspect.  I would answer all the questions truthfully.  For 2 reasons.

It is the quickest/easiest/most certain way to get the police to stop focusing on me.

But more importantly, it would get the police focusing on what happened to my grandchild.

All the more reason the parents should have been formally questioned at the start and not weeks later.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Carana on December 21, 2017, 08:50:59 AM
All the more reason the parents should have been formally questioned at the start and not weeks later.
.

What do you mean by "formally questioned"? In PT, you're interviewed either as a witness or as an arguido.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: faithlilly on December 21, 2017, 09:14:35 AM
So did they, except for Kate's arguido interview several months later, following a never-ending media onslaught, and what seems to have been a somewhat disconcerting evening at the police station the night before, and what her lawyer apparently eventually advised her.

Apparently? Seems you're not particularly convinced.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Carana on December 21, 2017, 11:18:16 AM
Apparently? Seems you're not particularly convinced.

I have no reason to disbelieve her account - it sounds authentic to me, but there will always be those who'll disagree.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: faithlilly on December 22, 2017, 09:48:53 AM
I have no reason to disbelieve her account - it sounds authentic to me, but there will always be those who'll disagree.

The why add 'apparently' ' You use apparently to refer to something that seems to be true, although you are not sure whether it is or not. The recent deterioration has been caused by an apparently endless recession.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Carana on December 22, 2017, 10:06:13 AM
The why add 'apparently' ' You use apparently to refer to something that seems to be true, although you are not sure whether it is or not. The recent deterioration has been caused by an apparently endless recession.

It was simply a way of avoiding a lengthy argument with certain people jumping in to demand a cite as to an independent confirmation of Kate's version. There isn't one, AFAIK. Hence "apparently".
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: faithlilly on December 22, 2017, 06:44:46 PM
It was simply a way of avoiding a lengthy argument with certain people jumping in to demand a cite as to an independent confirmation of Kate's version. There isn't one, AFAIK. Hence "apparently".

Yes, there isn't one.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Carana on December 22, 2017, 08:18:06 PM
Yes, there isn't one.

I know. So?

The lawyer did pipe up to state that it wasn't actually a plea deal, but that he was explaining the potential sentences in various scenarios. That might be as close as one can get from a lawyer. And no leaks from the PJ denying that they hadn't taken him aside to show him the dog "evidence".

I'm not sure if any of them actually got to read the Lowe report or whether it was just waved in the air as somehow damning evidence or not. The lawyer probably wouldn't have understood it anyway.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Brietta on December 22, 2017, 08:30:50 PM
I know. So?

The lawyer did pipe up to state that it wasn't actually a plea deal, but that he was explaining the potential sentences in various scenarios. That might be as close as one can get from a lawyer. And no leaks from the PJ denying that they hadn't taken him aside to show him the dog "evidence".

I'm not sure if any of them actually got to read the Lowe report or whether it was just waved in the air as somehow damning evidence or not. The lawyer probably wouldn't have understood it anyway.

Gerry whose scientific background might have allowed him to cotton on had he been given the opportunity to have sight of it; but he was refused.
What happened to the part of the penal code which allows an arguido to see all the evidence against him, I wonder?
MADELEINE:Kate McCann
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: stephen25000 on December 22, 2017, 08:38:23 PM
Gerry whose scientific background might have allowed him to cotton on had he been given the opportunity to have sight of it; but he was refused.
What happened to the part of the penal code which allows an arguido to see all the evidence against him, I wonder?
MADELEINE:Kate McCann

Are you quoting from Kate Mccann's 'book' as a non-biased reference ? 8)-)))
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 22, 2017, 08:48:58 PM
Are you quoting from Kate Mccann's 'book' as a non-biased reference ? 8)-)))

Brietta is quoting from Kate's book...it's up to the reader whether they wish to believe what Kate says...it sounds perfectly reasonable to me

Which part  of the post do you think may be untrue
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Carana on December 22, 2017, 08:51:14 PM
Gerry whose scientific background might have allowed him to cotton on had he been given the opportunity to have sight of it; but he was refused.
What happened to the part of the penal code which allows an arguido to see all the evidence against him, I wonder?
MADELEINE:Kate McCann

At the time, the wording was that an arguido had to be "informed" of the evidence. There was no clarification as to how.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: stephen25000 on December 22, 2017, 08:53:14 PM
Brietta is quoting from Kate's book...it's up to the reader whether they wish to believe what Kate says...it sounds perfectly reasonable to me

Which part  of the post do you think may be untrue

If  I quoted from Amaral's book as everything in it as fact, what would you say ?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Brietta on December 22, 2017, 09:03:22 PM
Are you quoting from Kate Mccann's 'book' as a non-biased reference ? 8)-)))

Forum protocol dictates that statements which are not "opinion" must be supported by cites.  The fact that cites may not be acceptable to you is neither here nor there.

It is worth noting that no-one has ever accused Kate of libelling anyone in her factual book MADELEINE.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 22, 2017, 09:04:04 PM
If  I quoted from Amaral's book as everything in it as fact, what would you say ?

I would explain precisely why it wasn't  fact so would you like to look at Briettas post and explain precisely what you object to
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: faithlilly on December 22, 2017, 10:57:04 PM
I know. So?

The lawyer did pipe up to state that it wasn't actually a plea deal, but that he was explaining the potential sentences in various scenarios. That might be as close as one can get from a lawyer. And no leaks from the PJ denying that they hadn't taken him aside to show him the dog "evidence".

I'm not sure if any of them actually got to read the Lowe report or whether it was just waved in the air as somehow damning evidence or not. The lawyer probably wouldn't have understood it anyway.

The lawyer said there had been a 'misunderstanding ' nothing more. He said nothing about 'sentences in various scenarios', that is merely your interpretation and cannot be sustained  by his actual statement.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Brietta on December 22, 2017, 11:41:36 PM
The lawyer said there had been a 'misunderstanding ' nothing more. He said nothing about 'sentences in various scenarios', that is merely your interpretation and cannot be sustained  by his actual statement.

In my opinion the lawyer did what lawyers do ... and that was to maintain client confidentiality.

In my opinion Kate's very upset good sister reacted to inside information misinterpreting what she had heard as a 'plea bargain' which it wasn't ... but a trade off of the release of one and a two year opportunity to brush up on jailhouse Portuguese for the other ... comes ... in my opinion ... pretty close to the definition given.

All that was needed was a 'confession'.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: slartibartfast on December 23, 2017, 07:38:44 AM
Forum protocol dictates that statements which are not "opinion" must be supported by cites.  The fact that cites may not be acceptable to you is neither here nor there.

It is worth noting that no-one has ever accused Kate of libelling anyone in her factual book MADELEINE.

You missed the very big IMO.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Carana on December 23, 2017, 10:15:09 AM
In my opinion the lawyer did what lawyers do ... and that was to maintain client confidentiality.

In my opinion Kate's very upset good sister reacted to inside information misinterpreting what she had heard as a 'plea bargain' which it wasn't ... but a trade off of the release of one and a two year opportunity to brush up on jailhouse Portuguese for the other ... comes ... in my opinion ... pretty close to the definition given.

All that was needed was a 'confession'.


If Kate's account is true, attempting to extract a confession via convincing the lawyer how serious the "evidence" was and thus advising her accordingly wouldn't surprise me at all. IMO.

Slippery stairs or other forms of the dark arts (e.g., deliberate sleep deprivation) weren't an option with the projectors of the world's media focused on the case.

If that's what happened, I don't blame the PJ for trying, certainly worth a gamble from their perspective. The only problem is that such tactics can lead to false confessions.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: faithlilly on December 23, 2017, 10:31:16 AM
In my opinion the lawyer did what lawyers do ... and that was to maintain client confidentiality.

In my opinion Kate's very upset good sister reacted to inside information misinterpreting what she had heard as a 'plea bargain' which it wasn't ... but a trade off of the release of one and a two year opportunity to brush up on jailhouse Portuguese for the other ... comes ... in my opinion ... pretty close to the definition given.

All that was needed was a 'confession'.

I agree with much of your post Brietta. It wasn't a plea bargain and anything else is simply supposition.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: faithlilly on December 23, 2017, 10:34:48 AM

If Kate's account is true, attempting to extract a confession via convincing the lawyer how serious the "evidence" was and thus advising her accordingly wouldn't surprise me at all. IMO.

Slippery stairs or other forms of the dark arts (e.g., deliberate sleep deprivation) weren't an option with the projectors of the world's media focused on the case.

If that's what happened, I don't blame the PJ for trying, certainly worth a gamble from their perspective. The only problem is that such tactics can lead to false confessions.

' If Kate's account is true'......indeed.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Carana on December 23, 2017, 01:22:08 PM
' If Kate's account is true'......indeed.

Have you found a contradictory account of the sequence of alleged events that evening?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: faithlilly on December 23, 2017, 01:36:43 PM
Have you found a contradictory account of the sequence of alleged events that evening?

Her lawyer said there was no plea bargain. Who else would you expect to have heard the conversation?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Brietta on December 23, 2017, 11:50:25 PM
You missed the very big IMO.

For what, exactly?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Carana on December 24, 2017, 03:40:34 PM
Her lawyer said there was no plea bargain. Who else would you expect to have heard the conversation?

Of course he'd say it was a "misunderstanding". What else could he have said? His job was to inform his client of her rights, to give legal advice as needed, and that would surely include informing her of potential sentences in various scenarios, wouldn't it? Pretty useless lawyer if he didn't.

As her lawyer, it makes sense that he was able to view the so-called evidence in order to advise his client on the "best" course of action.

When I first saw Eddie barking at the side of the car, my first reaction was that I found the footage quite chilling, as I'm sure many others did. The lawyer may well have done as well.

If that's the case, the PJ may have hinted that they were considering a murder charge in the light of the "evidence" (whether they really were, or it was a bluff or a genuine total misunderstanding). Alternatively, he may also have wondered himself whether the dog "evidence" indicated a far worse scenario than he'd originally thought.

Even if he thought she was innocent, he may have realised that the PJ might be out to get a charge anyway, and so advised her to consider pleading guilty to an accident, with a lesser charge than if they were to go for murder. Gerry and the kids could have gone home, etc.

However, if that was the thinking, I find it somewhat naive, particularly in the light of the other missing child case. If she'd falsely pleaded guilty to a lesser charge, there's no way in hell that Gerry would have been able to go home.

And the inevitable next step is "where's the body?"




Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: faithlilly on December 24, 2017, 04:44:29 PM
Of course he'd say it was a "misunderstanding". What else could he have said? His job was to inform his client of her rights, to give legal advice as needed, and that would surely include informing her of potential sentences in various scenarios, wouldn't it? Pretty useless lawyer if he didn't.

As her lawyer, it makes sense that he was able to view the so-called evidence in order to advise his client on the "best" course of action.

When I first saw Eddie barking at the side of the car, my first reaction was that I found the footage quite chilling, as I'm sure many others did. The lawyer may well have done as well.

If that's the case, the PJ may have hinted that they were considering a murder charge in the light of the "evidence" (whether they really were, or it was a bluff or a genuine total misunderstanding). Alternatively, he may also have wondered himself whether the dog "evidence" indicated a far worse scenario than he'd originally thought.

Even if he thought she was innocent, he may have realised that the PJ might be out to get a charge anyway, and so advised her to consider pleading guilty to an accident, with a lesser charge than if they were to go for murder. Gerry and the kids could have gone home, etc.

However, if that was the thinking, I find it somewhat naive, particularly in the light of the other missing child case. If she'd falsely pleaded guilty to a lesser charge, there's no way in hell that Gerry would have been able to go home.

And the inevitable next step is "where's the body?"

If the 'plea bargain' claim was not true why would the lawyer not say so ? What did he possibly have to lose ?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: John on December 24, 2017, 04:48:33 PM
If the 'plea bargain' claim was not true why would the lawyer not say so ? What did he possibly have to lose ?

Lawyers are the worlds greatest liars.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: barrier on December 24, 2017, 04:57:14 PM
Lawyers are the worlds greatest liars.

Will Shakespeare wasn't none too impressed with them back in his day either.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: faithlilly on December 24, 2017, 05:11:15 PM
Lawyers are the worlds greatest liars.

Why would he make his client into a liar ?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: G-Unit on December 24, 2017, 06:05:24 PM
In my opinion the lawyer did what lawyers do ... and that was to maintain client confidentiality.

In my opinion Kate's very upset good sister reacted to inside information misinterpreting what she had heard as a 'plea bargain' which it wasn't ... but a trade off of the release of one and a two year opportunity to brush up on jailhouse Portuguese for the other ... comes ... in my opinion ... pretty close to the definition given.

All that was needed was a 'confession'.

Who was 'Kate's very upset good sister'?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 24, 2017, 06:16:27 PM
It may well be that Kates lawyer having seen the alerts by the dogs ...and believing them to be evidence...actually thought Kate might be guilty....another reason to stay silent and also to accept the alleged plea bargain
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Carana on December 24, 2017, 08:55:57 PM
If the 'plea bargain' claim was not true why would the lawyer not say so ? What did he possibly have to lose ?

Smoothing PJ feathers?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: John on December 25, 2017, 02:50:43 AM
It may well be that Kates lawyer having seen the alerts by the dogs ...and believing them to be evidence...actually thought Kate might be guilty....another reason to stay silent and also to accept the alleged plea bargain

I have always thought the same.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 26, 2017, 08:43:59 AM
I think the fact that according to Kate she had already had a rather brutal interview from the PJ where she had been accused of covering up Maddie's death...been confronted with the dog evidence and realising in her opinion it proved nothing....realising in her opinion the PJ were totally on the wrong track...being very very scared...it is in no way surprising she took her lawyers advice and answerred no questions
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Carana on December 26, 2017, 09:45:58 AM
Oh, and we might show your picture on prime time TV when our choir appears on Britain's Got Talent. That'll help you to remain anonymous.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/tv/0/britains-got-talent-missing-people-choir/

An advantage is that the missing person (or anyone they're currently in conctact with) can simply contact Missing People confidentially. Or the police.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: slartibartfast on December 26, 2017, 09:50:26 AM
An advantage is that the missing person (or anyone they're currently in conctact with) can simply contact Missing People confidentially. Or the police.

Can we get back on topic please.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Carana on December 26, 2017, 10:19:08 AM
I think the fact that according to Kate she had already had a rather brutal interview from the PJ where she had been accused of covering up Maddie's death...been confronted with the dog evidence and realising in her opinion it proved nothing....realising in her opinion the PJ were totally on the wrong track...being very very scared...it is in no way surprising she took her lawyers advice and answerred no questions

An argument I've read elsewhere (more than once) is as some questions may appear innocuous, why didn't she answer those.

Not sure what anyone else thinks, but I can see a reason for not doing so...

Guess which questions would attract the particular attention of the officers?



@ Slarti: done. Soz.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: slartibartfast on December 26, 2017, 11:45:24 AM
An argument I've read elsewhere (more than once) is as some questions may appear innocuous, why didn't she answer those.

Not sure what anyone else thinks, but I can see a reason for not doing so...

Guess which questions would attract the particular attention of the officers?



@ Slarti: done. Soz.

Cheers.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: G-Unit on December 26, 2017, 12:19:37 PM
An advantage is that the missing person (or anyone they're currently in conctact with) can simply contact Missing People confidentially. Or the police.

You seem to be ignoring the fact that a missing person has the option of contacting those they left behind at any time. There are many ways of doing that confidentially, including speaking to the police.

What of the person who doesn't want to do that, has invented a reason for having no family and has built a new and happy life for themselves on that basis? Seeing their photo on prime time TV isn't going to be welcomed by that person.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 26, 2017, 12:26:30 PM
You seem to be ignoring the fact that a missing person has the option of contacting those they left behind at any time. There are many ways of doing that confidentially, including speaking to the police.

What of the person who doesn't want to do that, has invented a reason for having no family and has built a new and happy life for themselves on that basis? Seeing their photo on prime time TV isn't going to be welcomed by that person.

this is a very weak argument imo....are you really suggesting its wrong to look for a missing person by asking for the publics help because of the remote possibility taht they do not want to be found....
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Carana on December 26, 2017, 12:34:01 PM
You seem to be ignoring the fact that a missing person has the option of contacting those they left behind at any time. There are many ways of doing that confidentially, including speaking to the police.

What of the person who doesn't want to do that, has invented a reason for having no family and has built a new and happy life for themselves on that basis? Seeing their photo on prime time TV isn't going to be welcomed by that person.

I have been asked to get back on topic, so I guess I'll have to refrain from answering.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Brietta on December 26, 2017, 03:20:14 PM
Who was 'Kate's very upset good sister'?

Definition of good-sister in US English:
 
NOUN
good-sister
Scottish
A sister-in-law.

Origin
Early 16th century. From good + sister.

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/us/good-sister
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Angelo222 on December 26, 2017, 03:47:19 PM
An argument I've read elsewhere (more than once) is as some questions may appear innocuous, why didn't she answer those.

Not sure what anyone else thinks, but I can see a reason for not doing so...

Guess which questions would attract the particular attention of the officers?



@ Slarti: done. Soz.

If Kate's responses didn't match with Gerry's the PJ would have known that they were onto them.  A very good reason for keeping shtum.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Carana on December 26, 2017, 03:51:47 PM
If Kate's responses didn't match with Gerry's the PJ would have known that they were onto them.  A very good reason for keeping shtum.

If they were in collusion, why wouldn't they have matched?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 26, 2017, 03:52:11 PM
If Kate's responses didn't match with Gerry's the PJ would have known that they were onto them.  A very good reason for keeping shtum.

Being totally innocent and fearing arrest is another good reason for keeping silent
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 26, 2017, 03:57:14 PM
If Kate's responses didn't match with Gerry's the PJ would have known that they were onto them.  A very good reason for keeping shtum.

You actually make a very good case for silence....if through mistake or lapse in memory an innocent party could have given the PJ grounds for arrest...it really is that simple
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Robittybob1 on December 26, 2017, 06:00:13 PM
If Kate's responses didn't match with Gerry's the PJ would have known that they were onto them.  A very good reason for keeping shtum.
If Kate and Gerry gave different answers who would the PJ believe?  If we think they were going to believe Gerry have we not become prejudicial like the PJ did, when suggesting Kate could take the rap and Gerry keep on working.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Robittybob1 on December 26, 2017, 06:02:27 PM
If they were in collusion, why wouldn't they have matched?
Kate would have no idea as to what Gerry had said.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Carana on December 26, 2017, 06:54:09 PM
Kate would have no idea as to what Gerry had said.

They'd had months to work out a story, if they'd wanted to.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: G-Unit on December 26, 2017, 07:03:53 PM
Definition of good-sister in US English:
 
NOUN
good-sister
Scottish
A sister-in-law.

Origin
Early 16th century. From good + sister.

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/us/good-sister

Was there any particular reason for using archaic language?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on December 29, 2017, 11:22:28 PM
They'd had months to work out a story, if they'd wanted to.
If they were in collusion, why wouldn't they have matched?

They would not have matched as they had already given two different statements about a few things noted and mentioned in other threads. if they tried to stick to one version they other would be seen as lying or both not believed.

Kate had a legal right to abstain from answering those questions,however, in my opinion she should have wavered that right as any other loving, grieving mother would do anything to get help to find their daughter.

Think about Leslie Ann Downies poor mother- would  she refuse to have done anything to get her daughters killers brought to justice?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: sadie on December 30, 2017, 12:06:18 AM
Was there any particular reason for using archaic language?

I rather like it.

The use of unusual quaint words adds colour to a forum that at times can be drab. IMO
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Erngath on November 08, 2018, 06:18:11 PM
The McCanns were afforded due process right up to the arguido interviews but Kate McCann chose not to cooperate. A sad way to behave by any innocent mother whose priority should have been the return of her missing daughter.

Now can we rediscover the thread topic please.

And you really do believe that Kate's priority was not the return of her missing daughter?
Do you ?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on November 08, 2018, 06:33:50 PM
The McCanns were afforded due process right up to the arguido interviews but Kate McCann chose not to cooperate. A sad way to behave by any innocent mother whose priority should have been the return of her missing daughter.

Now can we rediscover the thread topic please.

Kate was absolutely correct to do what she did in the circumstances imo
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: John on November 08, 2018, 06:34:24 PM
And you really do believe that Kate's priority was not the return of her missing daughter?
Do you ?

Why else would a suspect refuse to answer the most innocuous questions?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: John on November 08, 2018, 06:48:16 PM
Kate was absolutely correct to do what she did in the circumstances imo

I totally disagree. In the situation she found herself she should have followed Gerry's example and answered every question to the best of her ability. Failing to do so only intensified the police interest in her imho as police will always consider a suspect's refusal to answer questions as suspicious and a failure to cooperate.

In this particular situation the police were tasked with finding a missing child. The parents and a colleague were the last known persons to have seen the child alive so it was not unreasonable in the circumstances to have expected their full cooperation.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on November 08, 2018, 06:50:07 PM
I totally disagree. In the situation she found herself she should have followed Gerry's example and answered every question to the best of her ability. Failing to do so only intensified the police interest in her imho.

That was only because the police misunderstood the forensic evidence... Thinking it pointed towards the McCann's... Which it didn't... That was a masive and unforgivable mistake by the PJ... Imo
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: John on November 08, 2018, 06:56:53 PM
That was only because the police misunderstood the forensic evidence... Thinking it pointed towards the McCann's... Which it didn't... That was a masive and unforgivable mistake by the PJ... Imo

Actually no. The forensic evidence suggested among other things, the possibility of a simulated abduction, as no evidence was found supporting an alleged break-in by any intruder.  In refusing to cooperate fully with the police, the parents were the architect of their own undoing.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on November 08, 2018, 07:40:34 PM
Actually no. The forensic evidence suggested among other things, the possibility of a simulated abduction, as no evidence was found supporting an alleged break-in by any intruder.  In refusing to cooperate fully with the police, the parents were the architect of their own undoing.

The forensic evidence supported nothing... Amaral is on record as believing the dogs and the FSS report supported death in the apartment... They didn't... He was wrong..
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Robittybob1 on November 08, 2018, 07:44:23 PM
The forensic evidence supported nothing... Amaral is on record as believing the dogs and the FSS report supported death in the apartment... They didn't... He was wrong..
I think John is referring to the initial crime scene evidence.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on November 08, 2018, 07:52:24 PM
I think John is referring to the initial crime scene evidence.
So what evidence supported a simulated abduction
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Erngath on November 08, 2018, 07:57:04 PM
Actually no. The forensic evidence suggested among other things, the possibility of a simulated abduction, as no evidence was found supporting an alleged break-in by any intruder.  In refusing to cooperate fully with the police, the parents were the architect of their own undoing.


Can you explain what you mean by " the parents were the architect of their own undoing"
Is this the "undoing" which has led to NSY spending much time, resources, money in investigating the disappearance of their child?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: slartibartfast on November 08, 2018, 09:50:11 PM
So what evidence supported a simulated abduction

The fact that there was no evidence pointing to a real one.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Erngath on November 08, 2018, 09:53:25 PM
The fact that there was no evidence pointing to a real one.

However is there any evidence pointing to a staged abduction?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: slartibartfast on November 08, 2018, 09:56:02 PM
However is there any evidence pointing to a staged abduction?

Yes, the fact that there was no evidence of a real one.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Erngath on November 08, 2018, 10:03:04 PM
Yes, the fact that there was no evidence of a real one.

But absolutely no evidence of a "staged abduction" as many here believe.
And as yet after an investigation by NSY still no evidence of a "staged abduction".
But still some here keep believing ??
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: slartibartfast on November 08, 2018, 10:12:05 PM
But absolutely no evidence of a "staged abduction" as many here believe.
And as yet after an investigation by NSY still no evidence of a "staged abduction".
But still some here keep believing ??

Still no evidence of an abduction.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Erngath on November 08, 2018, 10:15:11 PM
Still no evidence of an abduction.

Still no evidence of a staged abduction .
In spite of a lengthy investigation by NSY.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 08, 2018, 10:37:38 PM
Still no evidence of an abduction.
Whatever possessed them to announce that they believed Madeleine was abducted by a stranger then?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: faithlilly on November 09, 2018, 12:46:18 AM
Still no evidence of a staged abduction .
In spite of a lengthy investigation by NSY.

Since Redwood left in 2015 we have had no details of the investigation at all released by official sources connected to OG. We have no idea what they have been investigating for 3 years or indeed if they have been investigating a staged abduction.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: pathfinder73 on November 09, 2018, 01:28:01 AM
However is there any evidence pointing to a staged abduction?

No evidence of a break-in, tampering of the crime scene, evidence on alleged open window, telling everyone it was an abduction but the parents did not notify the police immediately, leaving the twins alone knowing an abductor is possibly in close proximity, contradictions in statements, twins not waking, an unlocked door is convenient in a staged abduction because anyone could enter and carry out the evil act, first police reports, Gerry 30 minutes after alleged abduction still not using Mrs Fenn's phone to urgently call the police (they were called 10 minutes after which questions the urgency of getting police on the scene), alleged moving doors when other witnesses saw it in a half-open position (Matt, Emma) etc.

Both dogs later alerted behind the sofa - look at the curtain - the only thing that stands out of place!
Another amazing coincidence huh *%87
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DgEl3qbU0AAcisO.jpg)
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Robittybob1 on November 09, 2018, 01:48:46 AM
Who would have moved that curtain?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: barrier on November 09, 2018, 06:54:12 AM
Whatever possessed them to announce that they believed Madeleine was abducted by a stranger then?
When Have SY declared this to be so,it that's who you are referring to.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Venturi Swirl on November 09, 2018, 07:13:05 AM
When Have SY declared this to be so,it that's who you are referring to.
Oh FGS. 
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: The General on November 09, 2018, 09:33:05 AM
Time, cost, trouble expended versus outcome (and I mean any outcome, anything at all, taxpayer dollar, anything at all there? A lead you say? Excellent........)
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Brietta on November 09, 2018, 09:38:06 AM
The questions being asked were incompetent due to a basic lack of understanding of the evidence which had misled the first investigation into Madeleine's disappearance in entirely the wrong direction.

The Policia Judiciaria concluded a year down the line ...https://expresso.sapo.pt/dossies/dossiest_actualidade/dos_madeleine_mccan/pj-volta-a-acreditar-no-rapto-de-maddie=f310393#gs.UmzIT0Q

Therefore in my opinion there can be little doubt that Kate McCann was absolutely correct not to answer the questions of the first investigation which the second investigation proved had veered entirely off course,

One can only despair of how that translates into the implications for Madeleine McCann and the cause for finding her.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on November 09, 2018, 09:42:54 AM
Time, cost, trouble expended versus outcome (and I mean any outcome, anything at all, taxpayer dollar, anything at all there? A lead you say? Excellent........)

What could they have done better... IMO it seems there problem us the refusal if the PJ to mount a joint investigation
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: The General on November 09, 2018, 09:55:16 AM
What could they have done better... IMO it seems there problem us the refusal if the PJ to mount a joint investigation
Then why keep the fiasco rolling? Why not come out and say that the PJ are refusing to play ball, pack up the coffee machine, lock the broom cupboard and go home? Why keep going back cap in hand asking for more money to fund an exercise in futility?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Eleanor on November 09, 2018, 10:05:13 AM
Then why keep the fiasco rolling? Why not come out and say that the PJ are refusing to play ball, pack up the coffee machine, lock the broom cupboard and go home? Why keep going back cap in hand asking for more money to fund an exercise in futility?

Quite possibly because a lead is being followed.  But they are hardly likely to tell us that.  Or do you think they should?
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: G-Unit on November 09, 2018, 10:14:55 AM
The questions being asked were incompetent due to a basic lack of understanding of the evidence which had misled the first investigation into Madeleine's disappearance in entirely the wrong direction.

The Policia Judiciaria concluded a year down the line ...
  • The hypothesis of kidnapping, followed or not of homicide, gains consistency and is now the line of investigation followed by the police.
  • The problem is that one year passed, of which half was "occupied" with the homicide thesis and concealment of the cadaver committed by the parents.
  • And the constitution of the McCanns as defendants would have been an error, or "a precipitation," as Alípio Ribeiro admitted. Some explain it by the impositions of the former Code of Criminal Procedure and by the indications that existed at the time: the detection of cadaver odor by English dogs was decisive to put the parents under suspicion.
https://expresso.sapo.pt/dossies/dossiest_actualidade/dos_madeleine_mccan/pj-volta-a-acreditar-no-rapto-de-maddie=f310393#gs.UmzIT0Q

Therefore in my opinion there can be little doubt that Kate McCann was absolutely correct not to answer the questions of the first investigation which the second investigation proved had veered entirely off course,

One can only despair of how that translates into the implications for Madeleine McCann and the cause for finding her.

In the same article Ribeiro says the PJ should have put the parents at their ease and kept them in Portugal where they were accessible. Quite how they could have done that after being told the couple were leaving he doesn't say.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Eleanor on November 09, 2018, 10:20:43 AM
In the same article Ribeiro says the PJ should have put the parents at their ease and kept them in Portugal where they were accessible. Quite how they could have done that after being told the couple were leaving he doesn't say.

The McCanns remained subject to extradition By Law for as long as they were Arguidos.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on November 09, 2018, 10:31:05 AM
In the same article Ribeiro says the PJ should have put the parents at their ease and kept them in Portugal where they were accessible. Quite how they could have done that after being told the couple were leaving he doesn't say.

As, I understand as arguidos they had ti have permission  to leave and this was granted
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Eleanor on November 09, 2018, 10:54:32 AM
As, I understand as arguidos they had ti have permission  to leave and this was granted

It was.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Lace on November 09, 2018, 11:37:49 AM
Putting myself in the position that Kate McCann had been in,  a foreign country,  questioned for hours,  being told there was 100 % DNA found of her daughter in 5a,  being told there was a witness who said he/she saw her and Gerry with a large black bag.    Yes I think she was right not to answer the questions it was obvious to me anyway that they were trying to stich her up,  it was Kate who found Madeleine missing, it was Kates fingerprint on the window,  it was Kate's clothes that allegedly had cadaver scent on them,   it was Kate they were trying to get to confess.   I would have stayed silent too.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: G-Unit on November 09, 2018, 01:12:07 PM
As, I understand as arguidos they had ti have permission  to leave and this was granted

I think Ribeiro meant instead of being made arguidos. Perhaps he was unaware of the unorthodox interview of the couple on 8th August by Encarnacao and Neves where the McCanns were left in no doubt that the PJ suspected them. It was certainly never recorded in the files.

On 8 August, without waiting for the results from Birmingham, the Portuguese police called the McCanns to a meeting in Portimão, where Guilhermino Encarnação, Polícia Judiciária regional director, and Luis Neves, coordinator of the Direcção Central de Combate ao Banditismo in Lisbon, told them the case was now a murder inquiry
Summers and Swan 2014, 158.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Mr Gray on November 09, 2018, 01:16:55 PM
I think Ribeiro meant instead of being made arguidos. Perhaps he was unaware of the unorthodox interview of the couple on 8th August by Encarnacao and Neves where the McCanns were left in no doubt that the PJ suspected them. It was certainly never recorded in the files.

On 8 August, without waiting for the results from Birmingham, the Portuguese police called the McCanns to a meeting in Portimão, where Guilhermino Encarnação, Polícia Judiciária regional director, and Luis Neves, coordinator of the Direcção Central de Combate ao Banditismo in Lisbon, told them the case was now a murder inquiry
Summers and Swan 2014, 158.

Without waiting for the results from Birmingham.... Says it all
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: G-Unit on November 09, 2018, 01:43:11 PM
Without waiting for the results from Birmingham.... Says it all

About the behaviour of Encarnacao and Neves,  which has passed under the radar, with all the attention being aimed at Amaral.

 Guilhermino Encarnacao, who was in charge of the Policia Judiciaria in the Algarve, died two weeks ago from stomach cancer.

Mr Encarnacao was convinced Madeleine had died in her parents' apartment and was a major source of a series of off the record briefings to journalists against the McCanns.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/7384911/Home-Office-launches-secret-review-into-Madeleine-McCanns-disappearance.html
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: sadie on November 09, 2018, 03:48:24 PM
About the behaviour of Emcarnacao and Nevers,  which has passed under the radar, with all the attention being aimed at Amaral.

 Guilhermino Encarnacao, who was in charge of the Policia Judiciaria in the Algarve, died two weeks ago from stomach cancer.

Mr Encarnacao was convinced Madeleine had died in her parents' apartment and was a major source of a series of off the record briefings to journalists against the McCanns.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/7384911/Home-Office-launches-secret-review-into-Madeleine-McCanns-disappearance.html

Are you sure that he is not in Brasil or up in his home village ?

Can you prove that  Encarnacao died ?   
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Eleanor on November 09, 2018, 03:50:42 PM
Are you sure that he is not in Brasil or up in his home village ?

Can you prove that  Encarnacao died ?

I'm not sure about that, Sadie.  But I do think Brazil could be interesting.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: sadie on November 09, 2018, 04:28:21 PM
I'm not sure about that, Sadie.  But I do think Brazil could be interesting.

I find Brazil and Paraguay very interesting too.  Remember the fairly recent sighting in Aregua in the Ascuncion area of Paraguay ?  I already had something of interest in that area before Madeleine was spotted there.

I also have a link to Brazil



Nothing solid yet though.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: barrier on November 09, 2018, 04:31:44 PM



Oh FGS.


SY haven't said as much then.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: sadie on November 09, 2018, 04:41:16 PM
Who would have moved that curtain?

Ummm ?   Good point Rob
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: G-Unit on November 09, 2018, 06:12:38 PM
Are you sure that he is not in Brasil or up in his home village ?

Can you prove that  Encarnacao died ?

What conspiracy theory is that from?

Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Erngath on November 09, 2018, 06:38:53 PM
What conspiracy theory is that from?

Perhaps Amarals conspiracy theory with the UK government and MI5 being involved.
He is fond of conspiracy theories.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: G-Unit on November 09, 2018, 07:08:12 PM
Perhaps Amarals conspiracy theory with the UK government and MI5 being involved.
He is fond of conspiracy theories.

Sadie seems to think Encarnacao faked his own death; which is nothing to do with what you have posted.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Erngath on November 09, 2018, 07:31:15 PM
Sadie seems to think Encarnacao faked his own death; which is nothing to do with what you have posted.

Well whatever Sadie's theories are, she has not published her theories to the detriment of anyone, unlike Amaral whose conspiracy theories have been published and expounded on many websites and television interviews much to the detriment of the parents of a missing little girl.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Carana on November 09, 2018, 07:40:30 PM
Are you sure that he is not in Brasil or up in his home village ?

Can you prove that  Encarnacao died ?

He apparently did die, Sadie on 24 Feb, 2010.

https://www.cmjornal.pt/portugal/detalhe/faleceu-guilhermino-encarnacao

https://www.dn.pt/portugal/sul/interior/morreu-guilhermino-encarnacao-1503437.html

Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: G-Unit on November 09, 2018, 07:41:14 PM
Well whatever Sadie's theories are, she has not published her theories to the detriment of anyone, unlike Amaral whose conspiracy theories have been published and expounded on many websites and television interviews much to the detriment of the parents of a missing little girl.

Why does every discussion seem to end up with Amaral being dragged into it?  His theories have no relevance whatsoever to what was said.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Carana on November 09, 2018, 07:45:01 PM
About the behaviour of Encarnacao and Neves,  which has passed under the radar, with all the attention being aimed at Amaral.

 Guilhermino Encarnacao, who was in charge of the Policia Judiciaria in the Algarve, died two weeks ago from stomach cancer.

Mr Encarnacao was convinced Madeleine had died in her parents' apartment and was a major source of a series of off the record briefings to journalists against the McCanns.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/7384911/Home-Office-launches-secret-review-into-Madeleine-McCanns-disappearance.html

He may have done, but I have some doubts about that (or at least the extent). It would take quite a bit of digging back to back up why I'm a wee bit suspicious.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Erngath on November 09, 2018, 07:47:42 PM
Why does every discussion seem to end up with Amaral being dragged into it?  His theories have no relevance whatsoever to what was said.

If you cannot accept that he had an integral part in the continuing discussion of the disappearance of a missing little girl, then in my opinion you are avoiding an important part of the debate.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Carana on November 09, 2018, 07:51:44 PM
Why does every discussion seem to end up with Amaral being dragged into it?  His theories have no relevance whatsoever to what was said.

Fair point, but he did place himself in the spotlight far more than any other officer involved in the investigation. Even prior to the actual publication of the book, he had a regular column in CdM spouting his theory as soon as he'd officially "left".
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: G-Unit on November 09, 2018, 09:08:20 PM
If you cannot accept that he had an integral part in the continuing discussion of the disappearance of a missing little girl, then in my opinion you are avoiding an important part of the debate.

Maybe so, but he played no part in Sadie's suggestion, which is what I was discussing.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on November 09, 2018, 09:19:46 PM
The Portuguese procedural system assigns the arguido the right to remain silent during all stages of the procedure from the moment of formal designation as arguido. The arguido is under obligation to give their true identity and details of a criminal record if any. The arguido cannot make any statement under oath. Under Portuguese law the arguido's choice to remain silent cannot be held against them.

Kate McCann's right was to remain silent. She chose to exercise that right. Quite why we don't know but the "they were gonna stitch her up wasn't they" and "She must have had something to hide isn't it" would seem not to stack up under the circumstances.

Bearing in mind that investigators are a bit like a badger with a curled up hedgepig, that is looking for a chink that may be exploited, the best strategy if there are two of you is one says nowt the other answers the questions.
Title: Re: Was Kate McCann right to decline to answer the 48 questions?
Post by: pathfinder73 on November 09, 2018, 09:56:51 PM
The Portuguese procedural system assigns the arguido the right to remain silent during all stages of the procedure from the moment of formal designation as arguido. The arguido is under obligation to give their true identity and details of a criminal record if any. The arguido cannot make any statement under oath. Under Portuguese law the arguido's choice to remain silent cannot be held against them.

Kate McCann's right was to remain silent. She chose to exercise that right. Quite why we don't know but the "they were gonna stitch her up wasn't they" and "She must have had something to hide isn't it" would seem not to stack up under the circumstances.

Bearing in mind that investigators are a bit like a badger with a curled up hedgepig, that is looking for a chink that may be exploited, the best strategy if there are two of you is one says nowt the other answers the questions.

That was confirmed when Kate and David both answered questions about the visit only hours before Madeleine's disappearance. What a cluster....