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: Montclair on September 24, 2013, 05:41:55 PM
-
Regarding the interim report and any later reports, I would like to remind certain people that the judge at the current libel trial stated that the archiving report was not a judgement but a piece of evidence. She also said more than once that the investigation was inconclusive, which means that no one has been cleared because it has not been determined which crime has been committed.
In the "acordão" from the appeals court which overturned the book ban, the three judges stated that the archiving report was nothing more than the opinion of the judge who wrote it and that Gonçalo Amaral's opinion was just as valid, in view of his 24 years experience as a policeman, since his conclusions were based on the files from the criminal investigation. The judges also stated that if the case has been handed to another judge, it is possible that this judge could come to a completely different opinion and conclusion and decide not to shelve the case.
BTW, as so many posters here believe that the McCanns were exonerated in the archiving report, I would like to know then why the parents did not request that the case not be shelved, especially since they were longer "suspect" and they could "trust" the police.
-
Regarding the interim report and any later reports, I would like to remind certain people that the judge at the current libel trial stated that the archiving report was not a judgement but a piece of evidence. She also said more than once that the investigation was inconclusive, which means that no one has been cleared because it has not been determined which crime has been committed.
In the "acordão" from the appeals court which overturned the book ban, the three judges stated that the archiving report was nothing more than the opinion of the judge who wrote it and that Gonçalo Amaral's opinion was just as valid, in view of his 24 years experience as a policeman, since his conclusions were based on the files from the criminal investigation. The judges also stated that if the case has been handed to another judge, it is possible that this judge could come to a completely different opinion and conclusion and decide not to shelve the case.
BTW, as so many posters here believe that the McCanns were exonerated in the archiving report, I would like to know then why the parents did not request that the case not be shelved, especially since they were longer "suspect" and they could "trust" the police.
Good post Montclair.
-
As quite a few posters here have stated that the archiving document exonerates the McCanns in the disappearance of their daughter, I was wondering then why the parents did not object to the shelving of the investigation. The Portuguese authorities had even extended the official deadline to give the parents more time to think about it. Since, for some, they are no longer suspects and have been officially cleared, there should have been no problem to keep the case open and go to the "fase de instrução". With the parents no longer "suspects", the investigators would have been able to concentrate on the abduction theory and might have found Maddie and her abductor.
Therefore, I ask the question once again: Why did Kate and Gerry McCann allow the case to be shelved?
-
As quite a few posters here have stated that the archiving document exonerates the McCanns in the disappearance of their daughter, I was wondering then why the parents did not object to the shelving of the investigation. The Portuguese authorities had even extended the official deadline to give the parents more time to think about it. Since, for some, they are no longer suspects and have been officially cleared, there should have been no problem to keep the case open and go to the "fase de instrução". With the parents no longer "suspects", the investigators would have been able to concentrate on the abduction theory and might have found Maddie and her abductor.
Therefore, I ask the question once again: Why did Kate and Gerry McCann allow the case to be shelved?
It's very easy.
They were given 20 days to make a decision and, first, had to get the files translated before they could read them.
Even Murat (who wouldn't have needed to get the files translated) would have needed longer than 20 days to read them.
-
As quite a few posters here have stated that the archiving document exonerates the McCanns in the disappearance of their daughter, I was wondering then why the parents did not object to the shelving of the investigation. The Portuguese authorities had even extended the official deadline to give the parents more time to think about it. Since, for some, they are no longer suspects and have been officially cleared, there should have been no problem to keep the case open and go to the "fase de instrução". With the parents no longer "suspects", the investigators would have been able to concentrate on the abduction theory and might have found Maddie and her abductor.
Therefore, I ask the question once again: Why did Kate and Gerry McCann allow the case to be shelved?
Because no longer being investigated as suspects themselves was more important than the search for their missing daughter continuing ?
I can think of no other logical explanation
-
Because no longer being investigated as suspects themselves was more important than the search for their missing daughter continuing ?
I can think of no other logical explanation
So true!
-
You must think that you are clever with your stamp jokes but you have not answered why the parents let the case be shelved.
I rather liked the stamp gags, actually. See ferryman's post further up the thread, he has answered your question in a nutshell.
Excuse me a moment, I just have to pop out to the Post Office for some stamps... @)(++(*
-
It's very easy.
They were given 20 days to make a decision and, first, had to get the files translated before they could read them.
Even Murat (who wouldn't have needed to get the files translated) would have needed longer than 20 days to read them.
Why didn't Paiva reopen the case?
Mrs Duarte branded Paiva a "liar" in court when he claimed he would reopen the Maddie case if new information came forward.
She said yesterday: "Every piece was treated the same way - Ricardo Paiva writes on it, 'this is not relevant to the investigation'.
-
Why didn't Paiva reopen the case?
Mrs Duarte branded Paiva a "liar" in court when he claimed he would reopen the Maddie case if new information came forward.
She said yesterday: "Every piece was treated the same way - Ricardo Paiva writes on it, 'this is not relevant to the investigation'.
Ricardo Paiva didn't reopen the case because that was not his responsibility. He received any new information or "evidence", made an evaluation and sent it on to the ministério público, who made the final decision as to whether the new information warranted a reopening. I think that some of the posters should take a course in how the Portuguese judicial systems works.
-
It's very easy.
They were given 20 days to make a decision and, first, had to get the files translated before they could read them.
Even Murat (who wouldn't have needed to get the files translated) would have needed longer than 20 days to read them.
If they had been "exonerated", what difference would it make to have the files translated? What a lame excuse!
-
Ricardo Paiva didn't reopen the case because that was not his responsibility. He received any new information or "evidence", made an evaluation and sent it on to the ministério público, who made the final decision as to whether the new information warranted a reopening. I think that some of the posters should take a course in how the Portuguese judicial systems works.
He could have asked for it to be opened, that was his resposibilty. But he chose to write on every lead 'this is not relevant to the investigation'. Whether the new information warranted a reopening, or not.
Portuguese judicial system stinks, I don't need to take a course to see that!
-
Why didn't Paiva reopen the case?
Mrs Duarte branded Paiva a "liar" in court when he claimed he would reopen the Maddie case if new information came forward.
She said yesterday: "Every piece was treated the same way - Ricardo Paiva writes on it, 'this is not relevant to the investigation'.
Mrs Duarte simulates forgetting, in front of the media, that the shelved investigation is nevertheless supervised by the Ministério Publico. The PJ hasn't the autonomy of the Met.
-
....edited out deleted quote ....
How long did they have to make this request Montclair?
And from when did that time start? Was it the day of the archiving or the day they received the files?
Reason I am asking is this.
If they only had so many days to lodge an appeal to stop the archiving, they had to do so, giving valid reasons as to why. For example, leads not properly explored during the investigation which would have been in the files, written in Portuguese.
So if they only had say 20-30 days. The McCanns would have had to get the files translated correctly. Then go through them with lawyers or people who knew how the appeal process worked. Cross reference this piece of information with that piece of information. All very time consuming. So is it not feasible to assume that the McCanns knew that they would not be able to get the files translated, cross-referenced etc before the time period expired?
Remember Kate McCann had a copy of all the files, including the reports of British children that were molested in the Algarve and those reports relating to the attempted molestations.
Are you trying to make me believe that when a case is archived, you just write a simple note to the Public Prosecutor and say "Don't archive this case" and he simply replies "OK then, the case will remain open"?
-
Why have my "Price of a stamp" comments been removed please, Mods?
This falsehood has been touted by Amaral for some time. "It would only cost them a price of a stamp to re-open the process".
The posts were perfectly valid to the topic. Extremely valid, in fact.
Please re-instate my posts if you want to be seen as a fair and balanced forum.
-
As quite a few posters here have stated that the archiving document exonerates the McCanns in the disappearance of their daughter, I was wondering then why the parents did not object to the shelving of the investigation. The Portuguese authorities had even extended the official deadline to give the parents more time to think about it. Since, for some, they are no longer suspects and have been officially cleared, there should have been no problem to keep the case open and go to the "fase de instrução". With the parents no longer "suspects", the investigators would have been able to concentrate on the abduction theory and might have found Maddie and her abductor.
Therefore, I ask the question once again: Why did Kate and Gerry McCann allow the case to be shelved?
Were they exonerated by the Final Report? Was it not a case of there being no evidence against them rather than being exonerated?
-
If they had been "exonerated", what difference would it make to have the files translated? What a lame excuse!
This is a strange pretext. Has Ferryman a source ?
I think, Montclair, they had more than 20 days because of the Justice holidays.
The investigation arguido delay was over, so they could be assistants of the process (necessarily accompanied by a lawyer). As assistants they could require interventions and there, yes, they needed to have the files studied. But they had the financial support of a Fund that had precisely been created on that purpose.
I'm not sure whether, depending on the developments of the instruction inquiry, there was no risk to be arguidos again. It seems that it was their fear or the fear of their lawyers... Otherwise it doesn't make sense they recruited Mr Halligen instead of having the PJ for free! Though two witnesses in the trial stated that the arguido status wasn't the problem for the McCanns, it certainly was for the TP7 when they mentioned the removing of the arguido status as a requisite before collaborating in the reconstitution.
-
....edited out deleted quote ....
How long did they have to make this request Montclair?
And from when did that time start? Was it the day of the archiving or the day they received the files?
Reason I am asking is this.
If they only had so many days to lodge an appeal to stop the archiving, they had to do so, giving valid reasons as to why. For example, leads not properly explored during the investigation which would have been in the files, written in Portuguese.
So if they only had say 20-30 days. The McCanns would have had to get the files translated correctly. Then go through them with lawyers or people who knew how the appeal process worked. Cross reference this piece of information with that piece of information. All very time consuming. So is it not feasible to assume that the McCanns knew that they would not be able to get the files translated, cross-referenced etc before the time period expired?
Remember Kate McCann had a copy of all the files, including the reports of British children that were molested in the Algarve and those reports relating to the attempted molestations.
Are you trying to make me believe that when a case is archived, you just write a simple note to the Public Prosecutor and say "Don't archive this case" and he simply replies "OK then, the case will remain open"?
Why did the parents have to have the files translated before asking for the "fase de instrução"? It was reported on television that the Ministério Público extended the deadline for the parents to ask for the case to remain open, so I assume that they did not have to give any evidence from the files. I also expect that their lawyer would have known what to do and would have informed them accordingly. It wasn't that difficult. After all, their daughter was missing and that should have been their main priority.
As for these cases of British children being molested in the Algarve, don't make me laugh. If this really had happened it would have all over the British newspapers at the time, the parents would not have kept quiet. Never any news about it here and it certainly would not have been hidden.
So you think that the Portuguese judicial systems stinks? What a xenophobic remark!
-
If they had been "exonerated", what difference would it make to have the files translated? What a lame excuse!
Not a lame excuse at all.
What a cynical comment, more like!
How could they challenge the archival without being fully aware of the reasons for the archival? They needed to study the files to know on what basis to challenge the decision.
-
Not a lame excuse at all.
What a cynical comment, more like!
How could they challenge the archival without being fully aware of the reasons for the archival? They needed to study the files to know on what basis to challenge the decision.
Yes study the files, and ask for it to stay open, by August the 10th.
How come the "Final Report" was circulating the internet, by the 22nd July, the report was only released on the 21st.
-
Why have my "Price of a stamp" comments been removed please, Mods?
This falsehood has been touted by Amaral for some time. "It would only cost them a price of a stamp to re-open the process".
The posts were perfectly valid to the topic. Extremely valid, in fact.
Please re-instate my posts if you want to be seen as a fair and balanced forum.
BUMP
-
He could have asked for it to be opened, that was his resposibilty. But he chose to write on every lead 'this is not relevant to the investigation'. Whether the new information warranted a reopening, or not.
Portuguese judicial system stinks, I don't need to take a course to see that!
You really should stop believing everything they print in newspapers.
Unless of course you have another, more reliable source for your claim ?
-
You really should stop believing everything they print in newspapers.
Unless of course you have another, more reliable source for your claim ?
It wasn't in a newspaper, it was in court 8((()*/
-
It wasn't in a newspaper, it was in court 8((()*/
Yes, Isabel Duarte said it and she knew very well that it was not the case. The ultimate decision as to the reopening of the case lies with the Ministério Público not with one inspector of the PJ, who never had the authority to do so.
-
Not a lame excuse at all.
What a cynical comment, more like!
How could they challenge the archival without being fully aware of the reasons for the archival? They needed to study the files to know on what basis to challenge the decision.
The reasons for the archiving of the investigation were given in the archiving report. They had a lawyer in Portugal who could have dealt very easily with the situation and given them advice as to the steps to take. There was no need to wait until the police files were translated. What do you think other arguidos, who have half the time to make the decision, do in Portugal? That's what lawyers are for. Didn't they consult their lawyer?
-
Remember Kate McCann had a copy of all the files, including the reports of British children that were molested in the Algarve and those reports relating to the attempted molestations.[/b]
There are no such files on the DVD and the deputy AG Melchior Gomes made clear that the files concerning sex offenders weren't included.
-
There are no such files on the DVD and the deputy AG Melchior Gomes made clear that the files concerning sex offenders weren't included.
TTSOFAFM, is correct.
They weren't included on the DVD's, but they existed. The McCann's, I presume got them when they asked for files in a UK court, from Leicester police.
From the Public Prosecutor's Office
Conclusion on 03-07-2008
Apenso VI - 1 Information, lists of suspects of sexual crimes contains elements that refer to matters from the private sphere of citizens that do not have any reference to these case files, as they were sent as informative data to be returned and for the purposes of helping the investigation, their function stopping there. The remaining of these documents in the case files would be a violation of the global defence of private rights of the citizens involved by means of the public divulgation of these elements, in relation to which the interest of the investigation was not justified. There for these reasons please return the two volumes that make up the Apenso Vi - 1 to the PJ, they should be returned to the UK police forces which sent them and to the other police forces that delivered them, according to article no. 86 no. 7 of the CPP.
Letter from Lawyers acting for UK Police Forces
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LAWYERS_UK_POLICE.htm
-
That's what lawyers are for. Didn't they consult their lawyer?
Of course. And their Portuguese lawyers were indeed anglophones.
I bet the Portuguese authorities sighed of relief that the McCanns didn't request the instruction inquiry.
It wasn't though tout est bien qui finit bien, but all is bad that ends bad, because the search for Madeleine had been up to the September deadline between Scylla and Charybdis, having been brilliantly entrusted to Metodo3 and then Halligen.
-
They weren't included on the DVD's, but they existed. The McCann's, I presume got them when they asked for files in a UK court, from Leicester police.
Have you a source about their existence ?
About the way the McCanns got them, you presume.. But you remember how the LC reacted when their files were requested..
-
It wasn't in a newspaper, it was in court 8((()*/
It wasn't in court, it had nothing to do with the book ban, it was outside the tribunal, she told the vultures and other vampires as she called them (this time she has another look) that she had been to Portimão and seen a lot of sightings with some Madeleine alike little girls.
-
TTSOFAFM, is correct.
They weren't included on the DVD's, but they existed. The McCann's, I presume got them when they asked for files in a UK court, from Leicester police.
From the Public Prosecutor's Office
Conclusion on 03-07-2008
Apenso VI - 1 Information, lists of suspects of sexual crimes contains elements that refer to matters from the private sphere of citizens that do not have any reference to these case files, as they were sent as informative data to be returned and for the purposes of helping the investigation, their function stopping there. The remaining of these documents in the case files would be a violation of the global defence of private rights of the citizens involved by means of the public divulgation of these elements, in relation to which the interest of the investigation was not justified. There for these reasons please return the two volumes that make up the Apenso Vi - 1 to the PJ, they should be returned to the UK police forces which sent them and to the other police forces that delivered them, according to article no. 86 no. 7 of the CPP.
Letter from Lawyers acting for UK Police Forces
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LAWYERS_UK_POLICE.htm
The Leicestershire did not give those files to the McCanns although the parents tried to get them by going to court.
-
The judiciary holidays in 2008 started on the 29th of July and finished on the 1st of September. The 20 days are working days.
-
According to Kate Mccan in her book they were happy it was closed as they didnt think there was anything much of an investigation going on anyway...and obviously if the case was kept open wouldnt they remain arguidos? (that last bit was my comment, not somethng in the book)
-
According to Kate Mccan in her book they were happy it was closed as they didnt think there was anything much of an investigation going on anyway...and obviously if the case was kept open wouldnt they remain arguidos? (that last bit was my comment, not somethng in the book)
I don't think they could have that statute prolonged, they would have been assistants, which gives more or less the same rights. But some solution should have been found on the reconstitution topic because it had been a request of the MP and hadn't been achieved.
-
Have you a source about their existence ?
About the way the McCanns got them, you presume.. But you remember how the LC reacted when their files were requested..
They were given 81 pieces of information.
Anne how do you remember how the LC reacted when their files were requested?..
-
As quite a few posters here have stated that the archiving document exonerates the McCanns in the disappearance of their daughter, I was wondering then why the parents did not object to the shelving of the investigation. The Portuguese authorities had even extended the official deadline to give the parents more time to think about it. Since, for some, they are no longer suspects and have been officially cleared, there should have been no problem to keep the case open and go to the "fase de instrução". With the parents no longer "suspects", the investigators would have been able to concentrate on the abduction theory and might have found Maddie and her abductor.
Therefore, I ask the question once again: Why did Kate and Gerry McCann allow the case to be shelved?
The archiving report doesn't exonerate the McCann, in fact it refers that they failed to prove their innocence (as can be read in the translation this Forum makes available in the documents sector).
I cannot read their minds and so I don't know why they didn't request for the investigation to continue. Nevertheless, as a normal human being I can only understand that choice as one made by people that feared the results that the continuation of the investigation could bring to them.
For persons that stated that they would never return to the UK until they found their daughter, the fact that they ran like rabbits, asking the British journalists to fill their EasyJet plane, immediately after being made arguidos, is quite revealing.
-
So you think that the Portuguese judicial systems stinks? What a xenophobic remark!
Did I actually say the Portuguese Judicial System stinks? No. What I was getting at, is this concept that it only takes a letter and a stamp.
What I was trying to clarify was simply this, if the McCanns wrote a letter with just the words, 'Please do not archive the case', that would have been sufficient for the Portuguese Public Ministry to reopen the case.
Surely the Public Ministry would have wanted to know why the McCanns thought the case should not be archived and on what grounds. And for them to do that they would have had to read thousands of pages, crossed reference one piece of information to see if the lead had been followed up. And the only way the McCanns could do this was by having the files translated into their native language.
So my remark is not xenophobic. And by the way, there have been many comments accusing our Government of being corrupt, police forces being corrupt and remarks from Portuguese posters saying our Police are protecting the McCanns and it is a disgrace how the McCanns are being protected, by officials in both Government and Law Enforcements. Are they not xenophobic comments?
-
Did I actually say the Portuguese Judicial System stinks? No. What I was getting at, is this concept that it only takes a letter and a stamp.
What I was trying to clarify was simply this, if the McCanns wrote a letter with just the words, 'Please do not archive the case', that would have been sufficient for the Portuguese Public Ministry to reopen the case.
Surely the Public Ministry would have wanted to know why the McCanns thought the case should not be archived and on what grounds. And for them to do that they would have had to read thousands of pages, crossed reference one piece of information to see if the lead had been followed up. And the only way the McCanns could do this was by having the files translated into their native language.
So my remark is not xenophobic. And by the way, there have been many comments accusing our Government of being corrupt, police forces being corrupt and remarks from Portuguese posters saying our Police are protecting the McCanns and it is a disgrace how the McCanns are being protected, by officials in both Government and Law Enforcements. Are they not xenophobic comments?
As I said before, the McCanns had lawyers here in Portugal and they could have dealt with this matter. It wasn't as if they had to make this decision all by their lonesome without any legal support.
This was not the case of sending a letter to the Ministério Público because this was during the period before the case was actually shelved. All they had to do was inform the lawyer of their decision and he would have taken care of the legal procedures.
-
The archiving report doesn't exonerate the McCann, in fact it refers that they failed to prove their innocence (as can be read in the translation this Forum makes available in the documents sector).
I cannot read their minds and so I don't know why they didn't request for the investigation to continue. Nevertheless, as a normal human being I can only understand that choice as one made by people that feared the results that the continuation of the investigation could bring to them.
For persons that stated that they would never return to the UK until they found their daughter, the fact that they ran like rabbits, asking the British journalists to fill their EasyJet plane, immediately after being made arguidos, is quite revealing.
We have gone beyond the AG report. SY have stated categorically having reviewed everything that the McCanns are not persons of interest in the case. They are not being investigated.
Your terminology about the departure of the McCanns is the kind of thing to be expected from people who have made up their minds about guilt without any proof. That is what is truly revealing.
-
Montclair, after the trouble they had to get it archived they would never require that it was kept open.
I don't know if you read the news about the Labour Milliband campaign, but it was quite revealing how the Labour Government intervened in this case. As a reminder, Ed Milliband and Gordon Brown arrived an hour late to the signing of the Lisbon Treaty, and the UK-PM only signed it after talking with the PT-PM.
Yesterday, Eddie Miliband in his campaign discourse accused Cameron of putting Murdoch above the McCann [http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/sep/24/labour-race-to-the-top-ed-miliband (http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/sep/24/labour-race-to-the-top-ed-miliband), forgetting that it was Cameron that ordered a 5 million pounds "investigation" (?!!!!), as if the McCann were any national priority!
-
Montclair, after the trouble they had to get it archived they would never require that it was kept open.
I don't know if you read the news about the Labour Milliband campaign, but it was quite revealing how the Labour Government intervened in this case. As a reminder, Ed Milliband and Gordon Brown arrived an hour late to the signing of the Lisbon Treaty, and the UK-PM only signed it after talking with the PT-PM.
Yesterday, Eddie Miliband in his campaign discourse accused Cameron of putting Murdoch above the McCann [http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/sep/24/labour-race-to-the-top-ed-miliband (http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/sep/24/labour-race-to-the-top-ed-miliband), forgetting that it was Cameron that ordered a 5 million pounds "investigation" (?!!!!), as if the McCann were any national priority!
Please explain with evidence how the McCanns got the case archived. That is totally ridiculous and very revealing of your standpoint.
Secondly do you have any actual evidence about the conversations of Brown and your Prime Minister or are you just guessing as anti McCanns so frequently do and repeating the claims of the disgraced ex-cop Amaral?
And please explain why you think it is so odd that Milliband should express concern over the fact that Cameron put the interests of Murdoch (a foreign citizen whose business empire was at the time and still is embroiled in major criminal cases) over those of one of his own citizens against whom there are no criminal charges and according to PT authorities not a shred of evidence of any crime by them? I find it totally perverse that Cameron should have done such a thing.
-
Please explain with evidence how the McCanns got the case archived. That is totally ridiculous and very revealing of your standpoint.
Secondly do you have any actual evidence about the conversations of Brown and your Prime Minister or are you just guessing as anti McCanns so frequently do and repeating the claims of the disgraced ex-cop Amaral?
And please explain why you think it is so odd that Milliband should express concern over the fact that Cameron put the interests of Murdoch (a foreign citizen whose business empire was at the time and still is embroiled in major criminal cases) over those of one of his own citizens against whom there are no criminal charges and according to PT authorities not a shred of evidence of any crime by them? I find it totally perverse that Cameron should have done such a thing.
@)(++(*
Millipede has no idea.......it was the Murdochs SUN that supported thr Mccanns for years, doh
-
Montclair, after the trouble they had to get it archived they would never require that it was kept open.
I don't know if you read the news about the Labour Milliband campaign, but it was quite revealing how the Labour Government intervened in this case. As a reminder, Ed Milliband and Gordon Brown arrived an hour late to the signing of the Lisbon Treaty, and the UK-PM only signed it after talking with the PT-PM.
Yesterday, Eddie Miliband in his campaign discourse accused Cameron of putting Murdoch above the McCann [http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/sep/24/labour-race-to-the-top-ed-miliband (http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/sep/24/labour-race-to-the-top-ed-miliband), forgetting that it was Cameron that ordered a 5 million pounds "investigation" (?!!!!), as if the McCann were any national priority!
It was David Miliband, Ed Miliband's brother, who campaigned on behalf the McCanns at the time of the signing of the Lisbon Treaty. IMO, Ed has no idea of what was in the investigation and is just playing to the crowd, very badly too. He doesn't even realise how much Murdoch and his empire helped the couple.
-
They were given 81 pieces of information.
Anne how do you remember how the LC reacted when their files were requested?..
They were given 81 pieces of information they actually had provided the LC with. This wasn't what they pretended to obtain and you know that.
You know why I remember the episode ? Because Mr Justice Hogg invoked the wrath of God on the perpetrators ! I thought I was hallucinating.
-
We have gone beyond the AG report. SY have stated categorically having reviewed everything that the McCanns are not persons of interest in the case. They are not being investigated.
No, definitively no. What you're suggesting might happen in the future though. But for now no entity has gone beyond the AG report. SY may investigate everything they require and the Portuguese authorities will certainly help, but they'll have to bring to the MP the evidence they'll eventually find, in order to reopen the case. Without evidence and on its own authority SY will not be able to establish x or y isn't and will never be person of interest.
-
It wasn't in a newspaper, it was in court 8((()*/
So were you in court DCI ? Or did you read it in a newspaper report ?
-
No, definitively no. What you're suggesting might happen in the future though. But for now no entity has gone beyond the AG report. SY may investigate everything they require and the Portuguese authorities will certainly help, but they'll have to bring to the MP the evidence they'll eventually find, in order to reopen the case. Without evidence and on its own authority SY will not be able to establish x or y isn't and will never be person of interest.
Yes, definitely, yes.
I have stated that the McCanns are not being investigated.
You seem to believe I am wrong.
In that case tell me who is investigating them. It categorically is not SY.
-
@)(++(*
Millipede has no idea.......it was the Murdochs SUN that supported thr Mccanns for years, doh
You clearly have not followed the story properly. Do read the link provided and see what its all about.
My post was entirely correct as those who do know about the story will realise.
And the man's name is Milliband, by the way.
-
Yes, definitely, yes.
I have stated that the McCanns are not being investigated.
You seem to believe I am wrong.
In that case tell me who is investigating them. It categorically is not SY.
How can we know what, and who, Scotland Yard are investigating ?
The 'investigative' element of the review has only recently begun ... and it will be fluid and adaptive according to evidences
-
Yes, definitely, yes.
I have stated that the McCanns are not being investigated.
You seem to believe I am wrong.
In that case tell me who is investigating them. It categorically is not SY.
No, you stated SY was beyond the AG report, which is, right now, not true. Let's see what new and solid evidence SY will bring (they're now investigating abduction, the McCanns could hardly be suspects of abducting their child).
-
No, you stated SY was beyond the AG report, which is, right now, not true. Let's see what new and solid evidence SY will bring (they're now investigating abduction, the McCanns could hardly be suspects of abducting their child).
Blagh. If those delicate McCanns had had an old-fashioned bucket and spade holiday, for the kids, instead of their own, personal crap, there would be none of this desparate upset.
I despair.
-
They practically gift-wrapped her and gave her away.
-
Blagh. If those delicate McCanns had had an old-fashioned bucket and spade holiday, for the kids, instead of their own, personal crap, there would be none of this desparate upset.
I despair.
What an unfair comment. Old fashioned bucket and spade holidays are mainly dependent on the weather, which IIRC was not conducive to their spending hours on the beach.
Incidentally, creche's and Kiddies clubs are not nasty cruel places, they are specifically designed for the enjoyment of the children who go there. The fact that they exist is proof of their popularity with both parents and children.
-
What an unfair comment. Old fashioned bucket and spade holidays are mainly dependent on the weather, which IIRC was not conducive to their spending hours on the beach.
Incidentally, creche's and Kiddies clubs are not nasty cruel places, they are specifically designed for the enjoyment of the children who go there. The fact that they exist is proof of their popularity with both parents and children.
Have you seen the photos of that creche they dumped Madeleine in every day ? ... a second story room that looks like an office - overlooking a car-park ? ... not even a little playground for a bit of fresh air
Every day of that holiday she spent there ... all day ... then a quick bath and into bed so the 'adult' holiday could continue into the night
It's unbelievable that people make exuses for the self-centred selfish behaviour of the parents on that 'family holiday'
-
Have you seen the photos of that creche they dumped Madeleine in every day ? ... a second story room that looks like an office - overlooking a car-park ? ... not even a little playground for a bit of fresh air
Every day of that holiday she spent there ... all day ... then a quick bath and into bed so the 'adult' holiday could continue into the night
It's unbelievable that people make exuses for the self-centred selfish behaviour of the parents on that 'family holiday'
So do you think all parents who sign their children up for Kiddie's clubs are self-centred and selfish or is it just the McCanns? If so that's an awful lot of people you are insulting. I see you have also exaggerated the time Madeleine spent there as well as ignoring the outside activities which the children enjoyed.
Attempting to make the Kiddies club sound like an unpleasant place to be is preposterous - as no parents would ever contemplate allowing their children to join - and they would very quickly cease to exist. And that would be bad news for any tour operator who wanted to claim a certain place as 'child friendly'.
The suggestion that parents 'dump' their children in Kiddies clubs is offensive IMO.
-
There is already a thread on this subject, unless this one is different.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1371.0