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: DCI on October 15, 2013, 01:01:52 PM
-
Why does he want to be involved now? He couldn't be arsed 6 years ago.
Gonçalo Amaral speaks on "publicity stunt"
Gonçalo Amaral, the former PJ inspector and author of the book 'Maddie - The Truth of the Lie', says the new facts in the case are "publicity stunt" the parents of the missing girl.
http://videos.sapo.pt/OBMLIZBOZbHKZgtNyrBT
-
>@@(*&) The Portuguese police not taking the sighting seriously has just been demonstrated to have been correct thinking?
It wasn't them who gave it massive publicity.
Although the Portuguese police did not publicise the sighting and instead made the parents suspects in the case, once their investigation closed the McCanns arranged for a sketch to be drawn showing the man Miss Tanner had seen.
-
Although the Portuguese police did not publicise the sighting and instead made the parents suspects in the case, once their investigation closed the McCanns arranged for a sketch to be drawn showing the man Miss Tanner had seen.
Why do you get so many things wrong dci.....tanners sketch was shown in oct 07......And while they were still arguidos..... case was not closed until July 2008!
-
Although the Portuguese police did not publicise the sighting and instead made the parents suspects in the case, once their investigation closed the McCanns arranged for a sketch to be drawn showing the man Miss Tanner had seen.
Easy now, you're rewriting history there. Sketches were done and released soon after the McCanns left Portugal in September 2007.
-
Why do you get so many things wrong dci.....tanners sketch was shown in oct 07......And while they were still arguidos..... case was not closed until July 2008!
8((()*/
-
There are 6 Portuguese police working with sy on this theory not on amarals theory
-
@)(++(* lmao at amaral ..dissing SY is not going to do him any favours ..silly man has not learned his lesson has he @)(++(*
How will it make any difference to him?
-
How will it make any difference to him?
it will make a lot of difference ..hes already in court for libel and hes still doing it.
-
Why does he want to be involved now? He couldn't be arsed 6 years ago.
Gonçalo Amaral speaks on "publicity stunt"
Gonçalo Amaral, the former PJ inspector and author of the book 'Maddie - The Truth of the Lie', says the new facts in the case are "publicity stunt" the parents of the missing girl.
http://videos.sapo.pt/OBMLIZBOZbHKZgtNyrBT
That video is from yesterday. Wait and see what he thinks today >@@(*&)
-
Ok, thanks. Is that the scene where Gerry and Jane agreed to disagree as to where they were actually standing?
I don't see that as either of them ridiculing the other, they simply had different recollections.
Was Anne suggesting that Gerry a) ridiculed her? and, if so, b) was the first to do so?
I'd find that a somewhat strange assessment as opposed to being declared a non-credible witness by the PT press and by Amaral himself way prior to that 2009 programme.
Just at random:
"It is false, wrong, most of the replies are not true" tvmais (no online link, appears in magazine only)
Hernâni Carvalho
10 September 2008
Interview with Amaral in reply to the McCanns' interview with Expresso.
The PJ discredits Jane Tanner's testimony. They say that when she saw said man with the child, you [Gerry] were chatting nearby and it was impossible that you hadn't seen him as well…
(Gerry says he didn't see because his back was turned while he was chatting with a friend.)
Jane Tanner's testimony has evolved in an inverse manner to human mentality. Initially, she had seen only a person at a distance. As time went by, she started remembering details in such a manner that at the end, she even remembered the texture of the clothing that the man and the little girl were wearing. That was how she pointed at Murat. The only deposition that is credible is the Smiths'.
www.mccannfiles.com
Precisely because Ms Tanner's sighting was questioned (basically because nobody saw her while she saw everybody), the suggestion of Mr McCann that she was mistaking the side of the street was too much. Apart from that he wasn't saying the truth (see JW's statement)
-
From Twitter :
Jerry Lawton @JerryLawton 49m
Amaral tells Portuguese paper Irish family who saw suspect carrying girl thought there was `high level of probability' it was Gerry #McCann
-
Amara lstates that his thesis is supported by british police..does he have ONE pice of evidence to support this...no he doesnt
He doesn't have a single piece of evidence to prove his claim that JT FORMALLY identified Robert Murat either. And who are these 'other people' who he airily suggests she also 'identified'? Where is his evidence for that claim?
-
He doesn't have a single piece of evidence to prove his claim that JT FORMALLY identified Robert Murat either. And who are these 'other people' who he airily suggests she also 'identified'? Where is his evidence for that claim?
He must know he's finished now
-
I've been told that Gonçalo Amaral will be interviewed on ITV at about 22h25.
-
I've been told that Gonçalo Amaral will be interviewed on ITV at about 22h25.
In English?
-
In English?
Almost certainly with a translator.
-
I'll believe it when I see it.
-
From Twitter :
Jerry Lawton @JerryLawton 49m
Amaral tells Portuguese paper Irish family who saw suspect carrying girl thought there was `high level of probability' it was Gerry #McCann
Oh dear.
-
Oh dear.
Quite, Amaral now sounding so utterly desperate it is awful to watch.
He is completely ignoring the fact that only one witness of all the that family even considered it might be Gerry McCann and he is completely ignoring the independent witnesses which show that Gerry McCann cannot have been seen by that family.
This ex-cop is clearly struggling to defend his appalling investigation.
-
Gonçalo Amaral has also been interviewed on TVE the Spanish television but I missed it!
I am absolutely shocked to find out that according to the Dutch newspaper Eevandaag the McCanns' fund paid for the Dutch version of "Crimewatch" Opspring Verzocht programme that it is to be shown tonight.
-
Both Martin Smith and his wife was interviewed again ( see the article on the Why is the Webmaster Misleading thread ) and the review team found them to be credible witnesses and both said the man they saw could have been Gerry McCann.
And no independent witness places Gerry at the tapas table at 10pm or thereabouts, that is a fact.
Indeed it is.
-
I am absolutely shocked to find out that according to the Dutch newspaper Eevandaag the McCanns' fund paid for the Dutch version of "Crimewatch" Opspring Verzocht programme that it is to be shown tonight.
Why are you shocked? That is what the Fund is for. Searching for their daughter. When they spend it on websites people complain. When they spend it on PI's people like you complain. When they spend it on TV programmes that appeal for information you complain. Precisely what can they spend it on in your eyes?
-
Gonçalo Amaral has also been interviewed on TVE the Spanish television but I missed it!
I am absolutely shocked to find out that according to the Dutch newspaper Eevandaag the McCanns' fund paid for the Dutch version of "Crimewatch" Opspring Verzocht programme that it is to be shown tonight.
I am fascinated to learn that you were shocked by the fund paying.
Why would that be the case?
Is the attempt to find Madleine not a fundamental function of the fund?
-
I've been told that Gonçalo Amaral will be interviewed on ITV at about 22h25.
Yes he will, just seen it, coming up withn next half hour
I will record it
-
I am fascinated to learn that you were shocked by the fund paying.
Why would that be the case?
Is the attempt to find Madleine not a fundamental function of the fund?
These shows are used to sell their story not to find Madeleine. All PR. Don't they have SY to look for their daughter?
-
Gonçalo Amaral has also been interviewed on TVE the Spanish television but I missed it!
I am absolutely shocked to find out that according to the Dutch newspaper Eevandaag the McCanns' fund paid for the Dutch version of "Crimewatch" Opspring Verzocht programme that it is to be shown tonight.
Did they pay also for the German version ?
-
These shows are used to sell their story not to find Madeleine. All PR. Don't they have SY to look for their daughter?
Just because you cynically believe that does not make it a fact.
It is perfectly clear both to officers of Scotland Yard and the general public that these programmes are a determined attempt to find out what happened to Madeleine McCann.
Did you not notice that the Crimewatch programme was actually led by Scotland Yard. It was a Police initiative from Scotland Yard. It was supported by the McCanns.
Your post either indicates you have not bothered to watch the programme or that you have not understood the way in which the police are actively involved as joint leaders in the production of the programme.
I think your attempt to sideline the programme as mere PR is quite ridiculous.
-
Quite, Amaral now sounding so utterly desperate it is awful to watch.
He is completely ignoring the fact that only one witness of all the that family even considered it might be Gerry McCann and he is completely ignoring the independent witnesses which show that Gerry McCann cannot have been seen by that family.
This ex-cop is clearly struggling to defend his appalling investigation.
well he looked fine tonigt on itv news
Basically:
SY has made no more progress than his (Amaral's) findings.
The sighting was a key point of his investigation too.
The man who replaced him did not want to follow this lead.
We're at the same place as in 2007 (sighting of man with child in his arms)
It took us 6 months to come to this conclusion.
It took SY 2 years.
Well done Amaral!
-
like how they just said on itv news amarals "old" investigation and what does he think of the new one 8(0(*
-
like how they just said on itv news amarals "old" investigation and what does he think of the new one 8(0(*
I like how Aamaral is receiving airtime. Can't imagine the McCanns are too pleased though.
-
I like how Aamaral is receiving airtime. Can't imagine the McCanns are too pleased though.
let him it wont do the mcCanns any harm why would it ?
-
You then admit that we only have Mrs McCann's word for the open shutters/window ?
Yes, what has this got to do with Amaral's comment (the topic of this thread)?
-
Did they pay also for the German version ?
Sorry, but that was information from a Dutch person who did not hear correctly and the correct statement was that the McCanns generated a lot money for the fund, etc. etc. Nothing really interesting so we should disregard the comment.
-
I am more inclined to think that the PJ Ispector who was interseted in his take might have embrioderd it a little. He isn't known for his honesty, is he?
You're forgetting journalists have spoken to that family.
-
I like how Aamaral is receiving airtime. Can't imagine the McCanns are too pleased though.
Can't imagine Amaral being too pleased with how the few seconds of him on UK television actually looked either!
Wondering why a whole third of his interview was devoted to him walking down steps, puffing on a ciggie, and meeting the journalist? Not the usual fare at all.
-
Can't imagine Amaral being too pleased with how the few seconds of him on UK television actually looked either!
Wondering why a whole third of his interview was devoted to him walking down steps, puffing on a ciggie, and meeting the journalist? Not the usual fare at all.
you took the words right outta my mouth Gilet..he didn't have a lot to say did he ?>)()<
-
Can't imagine Amaral being too pleased with how the few seconds of him on UK television actually looked either!
Wondering why a whole third of his interview was devoted to him walking down steps, puffing on a ciggie, and meeting the journalist? Not the usual fare at all.
Still not answer to my question gilet ?
-
Not the look of a confident person was it?
not by a long chore ..was hardly worth the air time @)(++(*
-
http://www.itv.com/news/update/2013-10-15/portuguese-cop-met-has-finally-caught-up-on-mccann/
-
I think the shit has already started hitting the fan for the McCanns, they can't last much longer now Amaral is getting air time.
The media is going to drop support for them soon.
-
I think the shit has already started hitting the fan for the McCanns, they can't last much longer now Amaral is getting air time.
The media is going to drop support for them soon.
what air time was that then ?the bit where hes walking down the steps puffing on a ciggie ?>)()<..or the bit where he thinks the investigation is a race 8(>((
-
Any air time!
Notice how his name is no longer prefixed with 's..m Cop"?
-
ITVs interview of Mr Amaral I transcripted off Sky, I may have got a word wrong or missed one here and there
Intro:The first Portuguese detective who first lead the investigation into Madeleine Mccanns disappearance says that the Scotland Yard review made no more progress than he did. Goncalo Amaral told itv news this evening the sightngs that the newly public efits were based onwhere a key part of his investigation too
Blurb tv clips about mccanns and crimewatch
Reporter:Chief Investigator Goncalo Amaral was in charge of the investigation at the time. He was taken off the case after he accused the mccanns of involvement in Madeleines disappearance and he is now being sued by the them for libel . However he told me the sighting was one of the best leads and was missed, he says the child may well have been Madeleine
GA:Everyone of us on the investigation found that lead important as we see now that it is
Reporter:But if everyone thought it was so important why was that sighting not properly pursued?
GA:When i left the investigation there was a gap and the man who came to replace me discarded that hypothesis he did not want to follow that lead
Reporter:What do you feel about the brit inquiry?
They are in the same place that we were back in 2007, that is they have a man who was seen carrying a child in his arms, we gotthere in six months, they took two years
-
"we got here in six months, they took two years"
that's why you got it all wrong Amaral in your rush to pin it on the mcCanns ..how silly do you look now 8-)(--)
-
ITVs interview of Mr Amaral I transcripted off Sky, I may have got a word wrong or missed one here and there
Intro:The first Portuguese detective who first lead the investigation into Madeleine Mccanns disappearance says that the Scotland Yard review made no more progress than he did. Goncalo Amaral told itv news this evening the sightngs that the newly public efits were based onwhere a key part of his investigation too
Blurb tv clips about mccanns and crimewatch
Reporter:Chief Investigator Goncalo Amaral was in charge of the investigation at the time. He was taken off the case after he accused the mccanns of involvement in Madeleines disappearance and he is now being sued by the them for libel . However he told me the sighting was one of the best leads and was missed, he says the child may well have been Madeleine
GA:Everyone of us on the investigation found that lead important as we see now that it is
Reporter:But if everyone thought it was so important why was that sighting not properly pursued?
GA:When i left the investigation there was a gap and the man who came to replace me discarded that hypothesis he did not want to follow that lead
Reporter:What do you feel about the brit inquiry?
They are in the same place that we were back in 2007, that is they have a man who was seen carrying a child in his arms, we gotthere in six months, they took two years
So Amaral is blaming Rebelo for not following up the lead. I see.
And he is trying to pretend that it has taken SY 2 years to learn of the sighting. How ridiculous!
And its still funny that you grabbed that video from a pro.
But most importantly this claim from Amaral who has stated categorically that Madeleine in his view (though he provides no proof) is dead, can only mean that he thinks this was a dead Madeleine. I wonder why he did not state that? Why was he so reticent? And it can only mean that he is still focused on the parents which is completely at odds with Operation Grange. Perhaps he does not realise that Operation Grange is working on stranger abduction? Does he not realise that Gerry was reported as being in the Tapas restaurant at that time by one of the staff?
-
"we got here in six months, they took two years"
that's why you got it all wrong Amaral in your rush to pin it on the mcCanns ..how silly do you look now 8-)(--)
he doesnt look silly at all, just stated the facts
the only people who are looking not only silly but positively suspicious are the mccanns and or their PIs who sat on these efits for five years befire sy dragged them out their files!
-
ITVs interview of Mr Amaral I transcripted off Sky, I may have got a word wrong or missed one here and there
Intro:The first Portuguese detective who first lead the investigation into Madeleine Mccanns disappearance says that the Scotland Yard review made no more progress than he did. Goncalo Amaral told itv news this evening the sightngs that the newly public efits were based onwhere a key part of his investigation too
Blurb tv clips about mccanns and crimewatch
Reporter:Chief Investigator Goncalo Amaral was in charge of the investigation at the time. He was taken off the case after he accused the mccanns of involvement in Madeleines disappearance and he is now being sued by the them for libel . However he told me the sighting was one of the best leads and was missed, he says the child may well have been Madeleine
GA:Everyone of us on the investigation found that lead important as we see now that it is
Reporter:But if everyone thought it was so important why was that sighting not properly pursued?
GA:When i left the investigation there was a gap and the man who came to replace me discarded that hypothesis he did not want to follow that lead
Reporter:What do you feel about the brit inquiry?
They are in the same place that we were back in 2007, that is they have a man who was seen carrying a child in his arms, we gotthere in six months, they took two years
its damage limitation and it aint working
-
its damage limitation and it aint working
Don't suppose it matters much, anyway. It's not going to have a significant affect on the outcome of the libel trial - the judge seems to have a good concept of what is relevant, even if others don't.
-
Yea, why was he taken off the case....and did his successor come up with anything new?
>@@(*&)
no he didnt
-
Yea, why was he taken off the case....and did his successor come up with anything new?
>@@(*&)
no he didnt
His successor Paulo Rebelo did nothing to solve the case, it was, as the Portuguese say: Para Inglês ver.
-
If you were a believer in conspiracy theories, you might think he was maybe getting to close to the truth and that his successor was more willing to let things ride and not inquire too closely.
-
If you were a believer in conspiracy theories, you might think he was maybe getting to close to the truth and that his successor was more willing to let things ride and not inquire too closely.
EXACTLY...... 8((()*/
-
If you were a believer in conspiracy theories, you might think he was maybe getting to close to the truth and that his successor was more willing to let things ride and not inquire too closely.
If you want to go down the crackpot conspiracy theory route answer this - why, if the powers that be wanted the case forgotten about, is it still being investigated by the Met, at considerable cost and in a high profile manner? Why not just get the McCanns back to Portugal and let the whole thing drop?
-
Why should I want to do that ? Why not read what I actually said.
-
my wages are on the McCann's ...especially after seeing amaral's 5 seconds of fame last night.. ?>)()<
hes a disgrace to Portugal imo..
-
As in all things, time will tell.
-
my wages are on the McCann's ...especially after seeing amaral's 5 seconds of fame last night.. ?>)()<
hes a disgrace to Portugal imo..
Itv invited him to speak.....that should tell you something.....
-
It tells me that at last the British media feel that they can begin to report both sides of the story, albeit by proxy.
-
It tells me that at last the British media feel that they can begin to report both sides of the story, albeit by proxy.
Do you think the British media feel that they can begin to report Amaral's fridge theory, jassi?
-
It tells me that at last the British media feel that they can begin to report both sides of the story, albeit by proxy.
Hes been interviewed on the bbc twice before...both times with very aggressive and accusatory questions, this time it was normal for wont of a better word
-
Do you think the British media feel that they can begin to report Amaral's fridge theory, jassi?
Who knows ? All sorts of things are beginning to appear.
-
Do you think the British media feel that they can begin to report Amaral's fridge theory, jassi?
No, I think the lead into that theory went cold.....
-
No, I think the lead into that theory went cold.....
thank heavens someone has a sense of humour
-
No, I think the lead into that theory went cold.....
Yeah, apparently the PJ put that one on ice
-
Yeah, apparently the PJ put that one on ice
It's like suspending the flow of time. But some are pragmatic and know that reality ends always catching you up. Without mercy.
-
yes sir mr Chemical Ali
Sweet dreams lmao, the mccans have never won a case ever and they are not going to now either, deal with it.........
-
Sweet dreams lmao, the mccans have never won a case ever and they are not going to now either, deal with it.........
Well, this the first libel case that ever reached court in fairness, so there's nothing to measure it against ( threats and intimidation have sufficied in the past )
-
Well, this the first libel case that ever reached court in fairness, so there's nothing to measure it against ( threats and intimidation have sufficied in the past )
And the McCanns were convinced that threats and intimidation were going to be enough to get Gonçalo Amaral to give in before the trial began. But they were wrong.
-
well I will say amaral hasn't much going for him
sacked ex cop
conviction for falsifying a legal document in torture case
Adultery
threatening his fancy woman's husband with a gun ?
trying to rip his own brother off
and tax evasion
not a honest man is he...
-
well I will say amaral hasn't much going for him
sacked ex cop
conviction for falsifying a legal document in torture case
Adultery
threatening his fancy woman's husband with a gun ?
trying to rip his own brother off
and tax evasion
not a honest man is he...
Was he sacked?
His crime was false testimony. As everyone who has read the case will know, it was a technical conviction and he actively did NOT falsify evidence which would have got him in trouble. Answer me this. If you are a supervisor at work and a customer is led to you with blood pouring from their nose and you ask what the heck just happened and your staff tell you the person fell over, then that's their side of the story. If the customer then says that one of your staff hit him, that's the other side. You talk to your staff and decide that they are telling the truth and fill in an accident form. Subsequently there is a court case and the customer is found to be telling the truth and your staff member was guilty of hitting him...
Are you now guilty of falsifying a legal document in a torture case? Or any case? 'Coz that's what happened to Amaral. He was convicted on the basis that he "should have known" when his "crime" was to trust his men.
Now subsequently your staff member appeals and wins. The customer is found to have a long history of self harm in shops seeking damages and is found to be in contempt of court and sentenced to 7 months. Woohoo! You're off the hook and exonerated. Your report was accurate and you're no longer a criminal, right?
Well, not in Portugal... the "crime" stands as the offence happened when not all the facts were known and you/Amaral "should have known better".
Legally he's guilty. Morally, you tell me after you've thought long and hard about the scenario I've just given you. I know it suits you to bash Amaral (and for the life of me I still can't see why... what if he had been taken off the case on day 1 - how do you know the next person wouldn't have done exactly the same as Amaral or maybe suspected the parents even more? You can't just keep blaming one man for all the ills that befall the McCanns and look reasonable, you know?
-
yes..you must be terribly worried about anarel
Mr Amaral is an idealist, Davel !
-
Was he sacked?
His crime was false testimony. As everyone who has read the case will know, it was a technical conviction and he actively did NOT falsify evidence which would have got him in trouble. Answer me this. If you are a supervisor at work and a customer is led to you with blood pouring from their nose and you ask what the heck just happened and your staff tell you the person fell over, then that's their side of the story. If the customer then says that one of your staff hit him, that's the other side. You talk to your staff and decide that they are telling the truth and fill in an accident form. Subsequently there is a court case and the customer is found to be telling the truth and your staff member was guilty of hitting him...
Are you now guilty of falsifying a legal document in a torture case? Or any case? 'Coz that's what happened to Amaral. He was convicted on the basis that he "should have known" when his "crime" was to trust his men.
Now subsequently your staff member appeals and wins. The customer is found to have a long history of self harm in shops seeking damages and is found to be in contempt of court and sentenced to 7 months. Woohoo! You're off the hook and exonerated. Your report was accurate and you're no longer a criminal, right?
Well, not in Portugal... the "crime" stands as the offence happened when not all the facts were known and you/Amaral "should have known better".
Legally he's guilty. Morally, you tell me after you've thought long and hard about the scenario I've just given you. I know it suits you to bash Amaral (and for the life of me I still can't see why... what if he had been taken off the case on day 1 - how do you know the next person wouldn't have done exactly the same as Amaral or maybe suspected the parents even more? You can't just keep blaming one man for all the ills that befall the McCanns and look reasonable, you know?
quite a story you have concocted there I must say ..you don't know that that was the case..amaral was convicted end of..mud sticks ...
the mccanns do not have any convictions ...as for bashing amaral.. why do you bash the parents of a missing child ???
-
quite a story you have concocted there I must say ..you don't know that that was the case..amaral was convicted end of..mud sticks ...
the mccanns do not have any convictions ...as for bashing amaral.. why do you bash the parents of a missing child ???
That's a swerve worthy of davel himself!
Benita, it's not a story (about Amaral) I've concocted. If you actually read up about the case, you'll find that's what happened. The story I did concoct was one in which I thought you may find it easy to imagine yourself and one that mirrors what happened to Amaral. I was only trying to see if you were capable of making a logical link...
The point about your Amaral bashing is that it's irrelevant. You're attacking an investigating officer basically because he doesn't agree with your point of view. If he'd been more more willing to "play ball" on the abductor scenario you wouldn't have a word to say against him. Your logic is that because he has a criminal conviction he's a "bad 'un" and his policing skills are diminished. With all due respect, this is not a logical conclusion to be drawing.
-
Exactly sort of point I made in another thread. Ad homenim attacks do nothing to further a discussion. It seems to me that these sort of arguments are the last recourse for those who have nothing left to argue. They are a lazy attempt to stiffle any further discussion. The fact that Amaral has a conviction, due to the type of conviction and the circumstances behind it, has no baring on this case and so should be unimportant.
I don't think that all those who are so quick to criticise Amaral are fully aware of the circumstances of the conviction. I'm also yet to see convincing evidence of half the other stuff they accuse him of and it really perplexes me why the McCann-supporter tactic is to go after every person who doesn't agree with the McCann version of events with the proverbial attack dogs in the hope of intimidating or (in their eyes) discrediting in some way. There seems to be an obsession with "outing" people as though that in some way diminishes anything they have to say? It doesn't make sense to me and it always seems to be justified with an argument along the lines of "well you do it to the McCanns so there!" which seems to be a case of guilt by association as far as I can tell? Because some that doubt the McCanns are extremist nutcases, we must ALL be extremist nutcases so we're fair game!
Back on topic, Amaral was/is highly respected in the PJ as an investigating officer. Had a great record for solving drug cases. Pretty obviously he knew what he was doing and he is someone that knows more about the case than any of us. Another criticism flung at him by McCann supporters is "he didn't even meet the McCanns!" well so damn what?! Who cares? What relevance does it have? He was the chief coordinator, not the flipping family liaison officer so why the heck should he meet the McCanns? What difference does it make? He's well able to formulate opinions on them from information given to him by his men so it really beggars belief that these accusations are supposed to be relevant about his policing capabilities.
It's just more of the same - attack the player, not the ball. Smear, discredit, accuse and repeat to fade. I don't even particularly like the bloke from the interviews I've seen with him but I respect what he's achieved and was trying to achieve in the face of what looks like great adversity in the McCann case.
-
There is absolutely no need for a senior investigating officer to meet the family of the victim, or victim or suspect in any case. However, the senior officer is in charge of the investigation and therefore responsible for the conduct of those under him. The head of the RCMP said at a conference recently that it was a resigning matter if a subordinate broke the rules as the head is responsible for the actions of his subordinates. If not the top is always insulated from malpractice.
Do you not think that in the present case that Amaral was a little to willing to take the word of his subordinates? What investigation did he conduct? Did he look at the medical evidence or for any corroboration? It is yet another indication of the partisan nature of opinions here. Views on Amaral depend on what side you take in the McCann case.
Cipriano is a different matter that requires its own investigation to establish if torture occurred or not and not by anyone with a vested interest. It is not a stick to use to fight McCann agendas, or rather it should not be.
I think any and every stick is used, irrespective of how irrelevant it might actually be.
Amaral is seen as the enemy and must be crushed by any means possible.
What McCann supports appear not to realise is that events have moved on and the newspapers are no longer as supportive as they were earlier. Attacking yesterday's enemy does not win tomorrow's battle
-
There is absolutely no need for a senior investigating officer to meet the family of the victim, or victim or suspect in any case. However, the senior officer is in charge of the investigation and therefore responsible for the conduct of those under him. The head of the RCMP said at a conference recently that it was a resigning matter if a subordinate broke the rules as the head is responsible for the actions of his subordinates. If not the top is always insulated from malpractice.
Do you not think that in the present case that Amaral was a little to willing to take the word of his subordinates? What investigation did he conduct? Did he look at the medical evidence or for any corroboration? It is yet another indication of the partisan nature of opinions here. Views on Amaral depend on what side you take in the McCann case.
Cipriano is a different matter that requires its own investigation to establish if torture occurred or not and not by anyone with a vested interest. It is not a stick to use to fight McCann agendas, or rather it should not be.
That bringing up the Cipriano case is not only tiring but also highly insulting. Leonor Cipriano is a confessed and convicted murderess of her own child. Furthermore, she was also tried and found a liar about the torture accusations over the PJ officers (which was a strategy designed by Aragão Correia do frame the PJ) - the Faro Court tried her, found her guilty of Lying and sentenced her to more 7 months in prison - I hope in the same prison where she was attacked by her inmates.
Why, when discussing the McCann case, do you keep talking about Leonor? Do you in any way think there is any similitude? Do you find traces in Kate McCann that are identical to those of Leonor Cipriano, the lying murderess?!
I find it very strange that you and some others insist to put side by side a psychopathic murderer and liar (duly evaluated by forensic psychiatrists and convicted in a Court of Law) and those that you pretend are as innocent as new born lambs!!!!
-
After almost 7 years you don't understand how the criminal investigative attribution of the PJ work.
It was not up to Amaral or to any PJ coordinator to evaluate the work of his colaborators, the inspectors and chief-inspectors, that is for the judge of the public ministry to decide. A coordinator simply manages the means and the distribution of tasks in order for the team to work. The contents of the work must be transmitted fully to the Investigation Judge and evaluated by him.
-
But it isn't just the McCann supporters. The [ censored word] are over- protective of Amaral too. Amaral's conduct in the Cipriano case needs to be looked at independently as does that of his subordinates. If he accepted the word of his subordinates without proper investigation, then he is culpable. There should be no tolerance of a culture of policing that supports without investigation what he was told. The complaints system that Amaral embodied here was utterly wrong. Amaral had to investigate the allegations impartially and thoroughly. He didn't do that and by not doing it he did nobody any favours least of all himself.
It is yet another reason to prevent police investigating themselves, or pretending to. If Amaral's subordinates were telling the truth and cleared themselves, or he did, who will believe it? And if they were lying , they need to be drummed out of the police and him too if he went to bat for them. Public confidence is important. Rooting out corrupt or violent police is important and so is protecting honest police from spurious accusations of malpractice. So what are the procedures for that in Portugal?
I fancy that more try to slag him off than try to protect him.
I, for one, just find it a tiresome and irrelevant distraction.
-
!You know the irony of all this is that given slightly different circumstances there could have been many on here arguing that the Amaral conviction was a miscarriage of justice. ;)
Of course it was a miscarriage of justice. The alleged torturers were acquitted because the accuser couldn't identify them in a line up (she used a piece of paper in Court written by Aragão to say their names, but even there she couldn't identify them), and the ones that were not in contact with her were accused of ridiculous crimes like omission to report (a crime that din't happen, and falsifying evidence, that never existed). In Portugal, people that followed this case know that the accuser was beaten in prison (as it's usual for children abusers or murderers) - there was an ex-inmate of her that testified about it but was dismissed because it was not convenient for the set up of Amaral. The Ourique prison director made a terrible mistake by not putting Leonor in a secluded area away from her inmates and when she came back from her 3 days holiday she saw the mess she was in. Mr. Marinho Pinto, her close friend arranged with the help of Aragão Correia, an inventive way for her not to be subjected to a disciplinary inquest and eventual dismissal.
-
But going back to the OP, yes. All this Crimewatch arrangement is, in my opinion, more than a "publicity stunt" (all that was revealed was a mere omission and replication of what was already known) it is a diversion maneuver to divert the attention from the Lisbon Trial.
Note: I have to confess that I haven't watched it and what I am stating is only based on what I read on the papers and blogs.
-
But it isn't just the McCann supporters. The [ censored word] are over- protective of Amaral too. Amaral's conduct in the Cipriano case needs to be looked at independently as does that of his subordinates. If he accepted the word of his subordinates without proper investigation, then he is culpable. There should be no tolerance of a culture of policing that supports without investigation what he was told. The complaints system that Amaral embodied here was utterly wrong. Amaral had to investigate the allegations impartially and thoroughly. He didn't do that and by not doing it he did nobody any favours least of all himself.
It is yet another reason to prevent police investigating themselves, or pretending to. If Amaral's subordinates were telling the truth and cleared themselves, or he did, who will believe it? And if they were lying , they need to be drummed out of the police and him too if he went to bat for them. Public confidence is important. Rooting out corrupt or violent police is important and so is protecting honest police from spurious accusations of malpractice. So what are the procedures for that in Portugal?
Excellent post, Dhingra. 8@??)(
-
Thanks for that additional info. I guess what I was trying to say (unsuccessfully) is that those who have knives out for Amaral could be arguing for his innocence were he not to have accused the McCanns of wrong doing.
You are welcome, even though this is just a very tiny account of what happened.
Yes, I understand what you say and I believe you are absolutely right. It's a shame people cannot look at the picture objectively - I mean, they are entitled to their feelings towards the McCann, but they should also be able to look beyond that.
And I must add that I am personally much closer to the Ourique director (we have a friendly relationship for almost 25 years) than I am of Mr. Amaral or of any of the other PJ inspectors, that I don't know personally.
-
Sadie, this is all your over-active imagination again. Very little of this is true and it's just a shining example of the Amaral-bashing nature of many McCann supporters.
And what, if anything is achieved by this anti-Amaral campaign ?
-
After almost 7 years you don't understand how the criminal investigative attribution of the PJ work.
It was not up to Amaral or to any PJ coordinator to evaluate the work of his colaborators, the inspectors and chief-inspectors, that is for the judge of the public ministry to decide. A coordinator simply manages the means and the distribution of tasks in order for the team to work. The contents of the work must be transmitted fully to the Investigation Judge and evaluated by him.
Who was the head of the investigation in Portimão then?
-
Sadie. Please amend your last post removing speculative comments about Dr Amaral and then repost it. This forum operates on the basis of evidence and not speculation. Thank you.
-
Back on topic, Amaral was/is highly respected in the PJ as an investigating officer. Had a great record for solving drug cases. Pretty obviously he knew what he was doing and he is someone that knows more about the case than any of us.
Snipped to address this point.
Do you have any confirmation of this?
Even John here has admitted that he didn't seem to understand certain aspects...
-
Who was the head of the investigation in Portimão then?
The Policia Judiciária is the only police force that does criminal investigation under the Public Ministry (Judicial system and not the Government) and in order to keep their independence, all their commitments are ordered and supervised by the Public Ministry. That is to say that every investigation is under the control of a judge assigned for that effect. Of course there is an hierarchy within the PJ teams, and obviously someone must be assigned a responsibility to supervise the work in the field, but in the end, every little decision has to be authorized by the judge. For instance, the attribution of the arguido status, which is a right consigned in the Legal Code, may be requested or attributed by the police, but only if the judge agrees with it.
If Amaral, as you so much wish to attribute him, was with total and full responsibility over the work of his colleagues, he would have used the phone taps because they were fundamental for the investigation, but since they had to have the authorization of the judge and he decided they were against the law, they were discarded.
The responsible for Madeleine McCann's case was Judge Pedro Frias.
-
Sadie. Please amend your last post removing speculative comments about Dr Amaral and then repost it. This forum operates on the basis of evidence and not speculation. Thank you.
Seems you have wiped my whole post? I thought that out carefully and I wonder why you didn't just delete any offending words.
That is what you would do with an anti post ... but my whole post gone !!!
Forgot.
It is OK to say anything to destroy the Mccanns, and put the boot in
BUT Amaral has to be revered. It is NOT allowed to point out HIS failings
On this forum: Different rules for the [ censored word] to the pros. NOT a level playing field.
-
Seems you have wiped my whole post? I thought that out carefully and I wonder why you didn't just delete any offending words.
That is what you would do with an anti post ... but my whole post gone !!!
Forgot.
It is OK to say anything to destroy the Mccanns, and put the boot in
BUT Amaral has to be revered. It is NOT allowed to point out HIS failings
On this forum: Different rules for the [ censored word] to the pros. NOT a level playing field.
Unfortunately one of the mods deleted it as it was being editing by myself. This should not have happened so will be reporting the obvious inadequacy to the software developer.
Your criticism is both wrong and unmerited. Please repost without speculating.
-
Try reading the post before replying according to your pre-determined agenda Luz. I said the Cipriano case is NOT a stick for McCann supporters to beat Amaral with.
I am really sorry if I misinterpreted you. I guess I reacted inadvertently without giving your message the attention it deserved.
I am sorry.
Not to excuse myself, because it was really bad from me to respond to your post in such manner, but I was responding to a sequence of previous posts...I can only apologize to you.
-
well I will say amaral hasn't much going for him
sacked ex cop
conviction for falsifying a legal document in torture case
Adultery
threatening his fancy woman's husband with a gun ?
trying to rip his own brother off
and tax evasion
not a honest man is he...
And then there are
- the criminal types he associates with
- Writing a book about a missing child virtually accusing her parents
- Writing it whilst he was still a serving cop
- Making money on the back of a missing child by writing this book
- From day one deciding that the parents had dunit
- from day one only looking for a dead child. not allowing the thought that she had been abducted to enter his haed
Oh and then there is the horror of the Leonor Cipriano case. Dont tell me that he didn't know what was going on there, the torture. He was head honcho
Dunno if he was also involved in the Michael Cook case, in the Jacinta Rees case or the Rene Hassee and Carolina Santos cases ... but they were probably all Faro / Portimao cases.
Cant remember the other things. Terribly tired.
Nigh Night
-
Sadie, Amaral didn't VIRTUALLY accuse, he accused the parents in fact. The McCann were accused of obstructing the investigation, to start with, and to occult or make inviable to access their dead daughters cadaver.
If at the time of the investigation there were clues that there was a death inside the apartment because of signaling in various places, that there was cadaver scent in the McCann woman clothes, child T-shirt, stuffed toy, car boot,....was it so surprising to consider them guilty?!
Forget they are the McCann and imagine "nobodies", would you find them poor victims with all those leads, not to mention all that was behind?!
-
If I was innocent and all the evidence that was shown to me was accusatory, you bet I would respond every question and I would stay foot in the Police station until they proved me wrong.
But the McCann with all the political, police and judicial protection they had chose to escape, sort of highclass burglars, in a plane filled with journalists invited by them.
-
Gosh. Is that true? I watched his 30 minute of so documentary giving his version of what he believes happened and I found it to be entirely credible. It was not sensational. He was measured and conducted himself with far more credibility and professionalism than he has been given credit for in the British media.
His investigation team didn't give much credence to the Jane Tanner siting and it now transpires they were right to do so. In any case, as many others have pointed out, the manner in which the child was being held was very strange - very difficult to hold a child who is nearly four in that manner.
I'm interested in the comment about the McCann's being 'nobodies' - I cannot help but agree that the case would have turned out differently. But why HAVE the McCann's received so much protection from high places? The freemason link, the fact that they are doctors, links with Leicestershire police force, media links?
A quick look at some of the people they engaged to advise them after Madeleine's disappearance would suggest a few shady characters.
I've done quite a bit of background reading on Amaral as I took had believed what I had read in the British press and thought that he was trying to frame the McCann's to cover up a botched police investigation.
However, you can see that he was successful in securing the prosecution of a parents in an alleged abduction case. There was a lot of mud being slung at him from the defendant's legal team as naturally the guilty parents preferred to pretend that their child had been abducted than to admit that they had lied and face life in prison. And their legal team obviously wanted to win the case, because that's how success is measured in legal terms.
So, once I had a bit more info on him, I saw his work in a different light.
Also, the reaction of the McCann's to the sniffer dog findings (which I believe are strong evidence for the theory that Madeleine died in the apartment) was really quite creepy. If they had been genuinely innocent of having played any part in her disappearance, then surely the findings of the dogs would have worried them. Maybe it would mean that their daughter really was dead (they believe she could still be alive, remember - that's what all the fund is for.........to keep looking for her.....oh right, I almost forgot.......)
But no. They dismiss the finding as 'inexact science' and Jerry even makes a flippant comment about 'ask the dogs' about the findings. At least dogs don't lie, Jerry.
And I'm not sure that the science behind your abduction theory is particularly sound either.
Or the comments made by both of them that suggest that the more confusing the case becomes, the better it is as no-one knows what is true or not.
And why would that be a good thing, Kate and Jerry? Are you suggesting that you would rather the world remained confused about what happened to your daughter? Why would that be in her best interests, either dead or alive?
Honestly, it's turned into a Jerry Springer show with Kate and Jerry not even bothering to follow their silly little script any more. Their arrogance, self-importance, self-righteousness and downright audacity is breathtaking.
-
hmmm...who was it that made a connection between this sad case and the other sad case of OJ simpson's wife......
....OH PLEASE....can we have a different outcome......
.......what is the point of having lawyers or a justice system if there are prominent people in it who are just going to run around like idiotic bullies in a school playground, scoring stupid points...
-
Of course it was a miscarriage of justice. The alleged torturers were acquitted because the accuser couldn't identify them in a line up (she used a piece of paper in Court written by Aragão to say their names, but even there she couldn't identify them), and the ones that were not in contact with her were accused of ridiculous crimes like omission to report (a crime that din't happen, and falsifying evidence, that never existed). In Portugal, people that followed this case know that the accuser was beaten in prison (as it's usual for children abusers or murderers) - there was an ex-inmate of her that testified about it but was dismissed because it was not convenient for the set up of Amaral. The Ourique prison director made a terrible mistake by not putting Leonor in a secluded area away from her inmates and when she came back from her 3 days holiday she saw the mess she was in. Mr. Marinho Pinto, her close friend arranged with the help of Aragão Correia, an inventive way for her not to be subjected to a disciplinary inquest and eventual dismissal.
If she was beaten in prison, why did the police officers write up a report about an incident concerning the police station staircase in the first place?
-
If she was beaten in prison, why did the police officers write up a report about an incident concerning the police station staircase in the first place?
Eh? Why wouldn't they? She ran at a railing at the top of a staircase and hurt herself on that. There was an incident, they did a report. What's not to understand?
-
how now for the "publicity stunt"?
-
Although the Portuguese police did not publicise the sighting and instead made the parents suspects in the case, once their investigation closed the McCanns arranged for a sketch to be drawn showing the man Miss Tanner had seen.
Dis-informing, DCI ?
The MP authorized the PJ to divulge Ms Tanner's sighting on the 25th of May, the McCanns became suspects more than 3 months later.
-
Eh? Why wouldn't they? She ran at a railing at the top of a staircase and hurt herself on that. There was an incident, they did a report. What's not to understand?
Carana and co should watch a very interesting series called " The staircase". It's on line.
-
Eh? Why wouldn't they? She ran at a railing at the top of a staircase and hurt herself on that. There was an incident, they did a report. What's not to understand?
what a load of baloney...you talk as though you were there...remember the Portuguese courts believe she was tortured by the police...
-
They dismiss the finding as 'inexact science'
Yes that was one of their biggest errors, the first one being the shutters/window, errors that betray a singular lack of imagination : Mrs McCann didn't correct it in her book. With a bit of subtlety she had said they were horrified by the idea and desperately denied it, but that they were hoping the dogs were by chance wrong.
-
If I was innocent and all the evidence that was shown to me was accusatory, you bet I would respond every question and I would stay foot in the Police station until they proved me wrong.
But the McCann with all the political, police and judicial protection they had chose to escape, sort of highclass burglars, in a plane filled with journalists invited by them.
But, Luz, they had lost Madeleine, they knew they could do nothing for her, so what else had they to worry about if not themselves ?
-
If I was innocent and all the evidence that was shown to me was accusatory, you bet I would respond every question and I would stay foot in the Police station until they proved me wrong.
But the McCann with all the political, police and judicial protection they had chose to escape, sort of highclass burglars, in a plane filled with journalists invited by them.
I don't think the McCanns trusted the PJ
-
LUZ said
If I was innocent and all the evidence that was shown to me was accusatory, you bet I would respond every question and I would stay foot in the Police station until they proved me wrong.
But the McCann with all the political, police and judicial protection they had chose to escape, sort of highclass burglars, in a plane filled with journalists invited by them.
I don't think the McCanns trusted the PJ
And who could blame them davel. If I was in a foreign country and realised their police were trying to pin a crime on me I didn't commit - I'd want to get home asap. It would be insane to stay in those circumstances.
And were all those journalists really so disinterested in the McCanns and their departure from Portugal that they needed an invitation to follow after them? What a ludicrous suggestion. The McCanns had arranged to leave anyway before they were made Arguidos, they simply left one day earlier than originally planned.
-
Publicity stunt or not. The announcement from the PJ in Oporto that they have found things in the initial inquiry which simply were not followed up properly does seem to be a slight on the reputation of Amaral and his team.
Perhaps that is why he appears so indignant now?
And to top that the PJ team in Oporto are apparently siding with SY and totally ignoring the thesis he came up with to defend his reputation, as he put it, back in 2008.
I wonder if he will now have to write another book to re-defend his reputation after this further slight from what he probably hoped was his own "side"?
-
amaral has had his nose pushed out.. ?>)()<
-
amaral has had his nose pushed out.. ?>)()<
He certainly gave that impression when interviewed so briefly last week on ITV.
-
He certainly gave that impression when interviewed so briefly last week on ITV.
yep and they certainly didn't give him much air time..an most ofit was walking down the steps puffing on a tab ?>)()<
-
yep and they certainly didn't give him much air time..an most ofit was walking down the steps puffing on a tab ?>)()<
Not great publicity for the man at all.
Perhaps he should write yet another book defending his honour against the vile ITV who portrayed him in this way?
-
Not great publicity for the man at all.
Perhaps he should write yet another book defending his honour against the vile ITV who portrayed him in this way?
Great to see you again gilet. Things not going as smoothly for the McCanns as it would appear huh ?
-
Great to see you again gilet. Things not going as smoothly for the McCanns as it would appear huh ?
where do you get that idea from huh?..the mccanns have got what they wanted....
-
where do you get that idea from huh?..the mccanns have got what they wanted....
Of course they have Benita.
-
Great to see you again gilet. Things not going as smoothly for the McCanns as it would appear huh ?
What a silly bit of speculation on your part.
I might be here to gloat about how well things are going for all you know of my motivation.
Why people come here is actually none of your business really. It is the content of the posts that matters.
-
where do you get that idea from huh?..the mccanns have got what they wanted....
Correct. There is little the McCanns wanted more than this. There is only one better thing they could hope for and that would be to find their daughter alive.
-
Not great publicity for the man at all.
Perhaps he should write yet another book defending his honour against the vile ITV who portrayed him in this way?
I thought the fact that he had any air time was truly astounding!
-
Correct. There is little the McCanns wanted more than this. There is only one better thing they could hope for and that would be to find their daughter alive.
Really?? The McCann's all along wanted the case reopening in PT?
That statement rather begs the question why did they allow it to close in the first place by getting their friends to refuse to participate in the reconstitution (which according to a report from PT today is what will now in fact happen as part of the re-opening)?
-
Really?? The McCann's all along wanted the case reopening in PT?
That statement rather begs the question why did they allow it to close in the first place by getting their friends to refuse to participate in the reconstitution (which according to a report from PT today is what will now in fact happen as part of the re-opening)?
Getting their friends to refuse ...
Where did you dream that?
One of the principal purposes of the reconstruction was to establish that Jane Tanner could walk past Jez and Gerry without being noticed.
Now no need.
We know beyond doubt that she did.
We also know that Jane Tanner's (honest) testimony turns out not to be relevant because the man she saw has been identified and eliminated from the enquiry.
-
Getting their friends to refuse ...
Where did you dream that?
No dream Ferryman. Pure common sense and logic. The requests for participation in the reconstruction were made in March 2008 AFTER the infamous Rothley hotel meeting in November 2007 where the McCann's met with the rest of the Tapas mob and respective Counsel.
As has been well established the McCann's themselves had no choice but to attend given their Arguido status however when the request from Rebelo and subsequent email exchanges were published they clearly indicate the witnesses talking to each other about participating and whether its purpose is to incriminate the McCann's.
It is quite clear and obvious to anyone with half a brain what has transpired in the background to kill it.
Furthermore as friends of the McCann's the idea that they would refuse to take part against the wishes of Gerry & Kate is clearly nonsensical.
Are you suggesting that Kate and Gerry WANTED to take part and their awful friends refused?
One of the principal purposes of the reconstruction was to establish that Jane Tanner could walk past Jez and Gerry without being noticed.
Now no need.
We know beyond doubt that she did.
We also know that Jane Tanner's (honest) testimony turns out not to be relevant because the man she saw has been identified and eliminated from the enquiry.
We do not know that she saw the man as she walked past. As Angelo pointed out after the CW program Redwood's words were very careful to suggest she COULD or MAY have seen the man. Why did he use those words rather than she did, particularity given the direction she described him walking was the precise opposite way he should have been walking?
So we do not know when and where she did see this man for sure do we?
In relation to the reconstruction it will allow investigators to understand better the window of opportunity for a later abduction, what Gerry and Matt saw in relation to doors and in Matt's case light at his later check and what the other members did and saw later on after the 9:30 check by Matt.
You like many supporters seem to want to play down the importance of reconstructing the events of the night. Given the knots the group tied themselves in and their later honing of statements to fit Jane's 9:15 abductor i can understand why.
It is a weak underbelly you do not want to see exposed.
-
So.. where are we?
The Met led the Crimewatch appeal for witnesses.
The Oporto PJ team has managed to get the case officially reopened due to the results of their side of the review.
What exactly does GA consider to be a "publicity stunt"?
-
Amaral says anything but his prayers...look where its got him so far ...in a court room
does anyone actually believe his theories ?..that the parents kept madeleine a fridge for 25 days then put her in a hire car and disposed of her body i find that hard to believe... a genuine question btw.
-
It is very noticeable how everyone targets Dr Amaral but he is only one man. A lot of police officers from both England and Portugal investigated the case and agreed with him. Where are these shrinking violets now?
Spending the sort of money Scotland Yard is doing on this case is madness. They obviously have far too many resources available to them to pursue wild goose chases whereas regional police services are starved of funds. But hey, its London, they get whatever they want.
-
Amaral says anything but his prayers...look where its got him so far ...in a court room
does anyone actually believe his theories ?..that the parents kept madeleine a fridge for 25 days then put her in a hire car and disposed of her body i find that hard to believe... a genuine question btw.
Not this part necessarily
"that the parents kept madeleine a fridge for 25 days then put her in a hire car and disposed of her body"
But with the basis for his thoughts along the lines of she died they lied,
I can go with that.
-
It is very noticeable how everyone targets Dr Amaral but he is only one man. A lot of police officers from both England and Portugal investigated the case and agreed with him. Where are these shrinking violets now?
Spending the sort of money Scotland Yard is doing on this case is madness. They obviously have far too many resources available to them to pursue wild goose chases whereas regional police services are starved of funds. But hey, its London, they get whatever they want.
where did they agree with his theories john ? you have to remember there is no evidence of amarals theories unless i missed something..did they ever find the supposed fridge ?
-
Not this part necessarily
"that the parents kept madeleine a fridge for 25 days then put her in a hire car and disposed of her body"
But with the basis for his thoughts along the lines of she died they lied,
I can go with that.
a big exaggeration from amaral I would say ..I remember he was spouting the ffs results before he even received them...very strange don't you think ..did he actually understand them anyway ?
-
where did they agree with his theories john ? you have to remember there is no evidence of amarals theories unless i missed something..did they ever find the supposed fridge ?
British police must have gone along with his theories to a certain extent as they were willing to do the DNA analysis on the car boot.
-
British police must have gone along with his theories to a certain extent as they were willing to do the DNA analysis on the car boot.
That ended inconclusive ...and remember it was a Portuguese investigation a lot has changed since SY got involved.
-
That ended inconclusive ...and remember it was a Portuguese investigation a lot has changed since SY got involved.
Can you name some things that have changed then? I thought there was a certain something called judicial secrecy that stopped things being known about ongoing investigations so I hope you're not just making guesses?
-
Can you name some things that have changed then? I thought there was a certain something called judicial secrecy that stopped things being known about ongoing investigations so I hope you're not just making guesses?
Judicial secrecy when it suited you mean...
do i have a stalker ? on the other thread you said you weren't interested in my opinon ..could of fooled me ...lol
-
That ended inconclusive ...and remember it was a Portuguese investigation a lot has changed since SY got involved.
Yes, it ended inconclusively but it also shows that British police were indeed open at one point to the idea that the McCanns may have been involved in the disappearance of their daughter, not just Amaral.
-
Judicial secrecy when it suited you mean...
do i have a stalker ? on the other thread you said you weren't interested in my opinon ..could of fooled me ...lol
Please feel free to find where I said I have no interest in your opinion and post it here. I'll wait.
-
25/10/13
C.Edwards
Re: PM query .
« Reply #26 on: Today at 05:32:42 PM
I have no interest in, nor opinion of, your deflection question.
-
I thought the fact that he had any air time was truly astounding!
Actually I have to agree with you on that. It really isn't often that a policeman who got thrown off the case and was later convicted of a criminal offence relating to a similar case is given air time to discuss events, is it?
-
25/10/13
C.Edwards
Re: PM query .
« Reply #26 on: Today at 05:32:42 PM
I have no interest in, nor opinion of, your deflection question.
thanks ..but I wasn't going to go running around after Edwards ..to prove myself right ..I knew I was 8((()*/
-
25/10/13
C.Edwards
Re: PM query .
« Reply #26 on: Today at 05:32:42 PM
I have no interest in, nor opinion of, your deflection question.
@)(++(* 8@??)(
The "deflection question" was at the end of lizzibifs response and was: 'why do you think SY got the case reopened "Abduction"'. It was a clear attempt at sidetracking and not actually attempting to stick to the point. Again.
Seriously, have both of you failed to pick up on this? Good grief...
-
British police must have gone along with his theories to a certain extent as they were willing to do the DNA analysis on the car boot.
The DNA analysis was not done on the basis of Amaral's thesis which officially came later, but after the dog alerts. The results of the DNA analysis related to the car identified Gerry McCann's blood on the key fob and a mix of McCann familial DNA elsewhere. It did not support Amaral's theory.
-
thanks ..but I wasn't going to go running around after Edwards ..to prove myself right ..I knew I was 8((()*/
Are you feeling a little silly right now? Even if I hadn't been talking directly about your attempted sidetracking question, it STILL doesn't say I'm not interested in your opinion! I am interested in hearing the slightest bit of proof of these vague accusations you're flinging about though. I don't expect for a minute I'll get any, but I do like to ask anyway.
-
Yes, it ended inconclusively but it also shows that British police were indeed open at one point to the idea that the McCanns may have been involved in the disappearance of their daughter, not just Amaral.
It was a normal procedure after a dog alert. It was not arranged by British Police but by the Portuguese who arranged for the dogs and then sent the samples to the UK directly.
-
The DNA analysis was not done on the basis of Amaral's thesis which officially came later, but after the dog alerts. The results of the DNA analysis related to the car identified Gerry McCann's blood on the key fob and a mix of McCann familial DNA elsewhere. It did not support Amaral's theory.
Didn't rule it out either.
-
Are you feeling a little silly right now? Even if I hadn't been talking directly about your attempted sidetracking question, it STILL doesn't say I'm not interested in your opinion! I am interested in hearing the slightest bit of proof of these vague accusations you're flinging about though. I don't expect for a minute I'll get any, but I do like to ask anyway.
After insulting my English usage and disrespecting me ..you don't deserve anything ..so don't ask ok
-
Didn't rule it out either.
Didn't rule it out..thats what is called a celestial teapot argument
-
After insulting my English usage and disrespecting me ..you don't deserve anything ..so don't ask ok
"Disrespecting" you? @)(++(* @)(++(* Are you going to "pop a cap in my ass" ? Oh my. So basically you're using the "I can't be bothered to respond to you" argument to hide the fact that you have absolutely no evidence whatsoever to back up your claims.
I shall look forward to said claims being deleted from the forum then.
-
"Disrespecting" you? @)(++(* @)(++(* Are you going to "pop a cap in my ass" ? Oh my. So basically you're using the "I can't be bothered to respond to you" argument to hide the fact that you have absolutely no evidence whatsoever to back up your claims.
I shall look forward to said claims being deleted from the forum then.
whatever ..I see your insulting post has gone 8)-)))
-
whatever ..I see your insulting post has gone 8)-)))
In what way did you find it insulting? Because it was factually correct? Oh well, whatever indeed.
Personally I still find the opinions of the erstwhile coordinator of the McCann investigation to be somewhat relevant. Even when they don't coincide with my own views.
-
You insulted lizzibif's English grammar...maybe she has cronic disabilities like the poster carlymichelle you should think before you post insults to posters especially new ones ... A warning should be issued to you for breaking rules of the forum......
-
I think he was referring to crimewatch.
his own police force has been involved in this investigation for two years..crimewatch is part of the investigation
-
his own police force has been involved in this investigation for two years..crimewatch is part of the investigation
The investigation that has found new leads and request the reopening of the case is separate.
-
I am willing to go along with that face saving explanation.
-
The investigation that has found new leads and request the reopening of the case is separate.
I would say this is just SY letting the PJ save face..it doesnt change amarals position..he is the one who led the bungled investigation..as the press says
-
doesn't it seem strange that just when SY announce a major breakthrough ...the PJ re open the case
-
I would say this is just SY letting the PJ save face..it doesnt change amarals position..he is the one who led the bungled investigation..as the press says
Well if it's in the red tops, I believe it!
Time will tell davel. Things actually do seems to be progressing. In the words of Leonard Cohen 'One of us cannot be wrong'.
-
Well if it's in the red tops, I believe it!
Time will tell davel. Things actually do seems to be progressing. In the words of Leonard Cohen 'One of us cannot be wrong'.
I haven't seen the red tops but if the PJ have found any new evidence they found it in redwoods briefcase
-
Well if it's in the red tops, I believe it!
Time will tell davel. Things actually do seems to be progressing. In the words of Leonard Cohen 'One of us cannot be wrong'.
A lot of the debate on here seems to be whether the glass is half full or half empty...but the posters cant see it
-
A lot of the debate on here seems to be whether the glass is half full or half empty...but the posters cant see it
I wish I could be optimistic and say that Madeleine Mccann is alive and well, in the care of people who love her and isn't traumatised in the slightest.
I think the chances of that are so incredibly slim that I wouldn't put a penny one them. That doesn't mean that I wish her harm or suffering.
Whatever happened to her, I sincerely hope that it was quick and clean.
I don't think there will be a fairy tale ending to this storey.
-
Didn't rule it out either.
It didn't rule out it being from Kate's mum either, or Kate or Gerry or the twins or ...
But for you that seems to be enough to prove a child is dead.
A very warped understanding of both DNA and the nature of proof I would suggest.
-
I haven't seen the red tops but if the PJ have found any new evidence they found it in redwoods briefcase
My very thoughts.