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: Alfred R Jones on April 28, 2014, 06:15:00 PM
Title: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Alfred R Jones on April 28, 2014, 06:15:00 PM
In the absence of any other detailed non-abduction theory about what happened to Madeleine McCann I thought it might be worth re-visiting Amaral's thesis. With all that we now know about the case, is his thesis at all credible? Does it hang together coherently as a plausible account of events? Is there any evidence that those currently investigating the case are using his thesis as a basis for their investigations?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Cornelius on April 28, 2014, 07:36:35 PM
In the absence of any other detailed non-abduction theory about what happened to Madeleine McCann I thought it might be worth re-visiting Amaral's thesis. With all that we now know about the case, is his thesis at all credible? Does it hang together coherently as a plausible account of events? Is there any evidence that those currently investigating the case are using his thesis as a basis for their investigations?
Unless we are privy to all that the Metropolitan Police Service and Policia Judiciara are investigating we will be unable to make any sound judgement on that matter. I am sure I know the screen names of all those who will now disagree with my statement 8(>((
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: peter claridge on April 28, 2014, 08:01:31 PM
In the absence of any other detailed non-abduction theory about what happened to Madeleine McCann I thought it might be worth re-visiting Amaral's thesis. With all that we now know about the case, is his thesis at all credible? Does it hang together coherently as a plausible account of events? Is there any evidence that those currently investigating the case are using his thesis as a basis for their investigations?
What is it exactly that we now know about the case?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Alfred R Jones on April 28, 2014, 08:30:57 PM
What is it exactly that we now know about the case?
Well, there are the thousands of pages of Police Files for a start. Then there is the information that has been released by Scotland Yard since they re-opened the investigation. I won't bother mentioning Kate McCann's book as that tends to elicit sneers of derision when cited as a source of information. Do you think Amaral's theory presents a coherent and plausible explanation for Madeleine's disappearance?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: icabodcrane on April 28, 2014, 08:56:18 PM
Well, there are the thousands of pages of Police Files for a start. Then there is the information that has been released by Scotland Yard since they re-opened the investigation. I won't bother mentioning Kate McCann's book as that tends to elicit sneers of derision when cited as a source of information. Do you think Amaral's theory presents a coherent and plausible explanation for Madeleine's disappearance?
I am not familiar with Amaral's thesis except in the broadest terms, not having read his book
Broadly speaking, then, he believes Madeleine died in apartment 5A as a result of an accident, doesn't he ? ... and that an abduction was staged and her body disposed of
The fact that a cadaver dog alerted in that apartment lends plausibility to her death in the apartment and the fact that the window was opened from the inside might be said to lend plausibility to the suggestion that an abduction was staged
As to the parents disposing of their dead child's body, I can't think of anything that makes that part of his thesis plausible ... it seems incomprehensible to me that these clearly loving parents could carry out such a callous and cold hearted act
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 28, 2014, 08:59:31 PM
I am not familiar with Amaral's thesis except in the broadest terms, not having read his book
Broadly speaking, then, he believes Madeleine died in apartment 5A as a result of an accident, doesn't he ? ... and that an abduction was staged and her body disposed of
The fact that a cadaver dog alerted in that apartment lends plausibility to her death in the apartment and the fact that the window was opened from the inside might be said to lend plausibility to the suggestion that an abduction was staged
As to the parents disposing of their dead child's body, I can't think of anything that makes that part of his thesis plausible ... it seems incomprehensible to me that these clearly loving parents could carry out such a callous and cold hearted act
Desperate times, desperate measures.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: icabodcrane on April 28, 2014, 09:07:20 PM
I am not familiar with Amaral's thesis except in the broadest terms, not having read his book
Broadly speaking, then, he believes Madeleine died in apartment 5A as a result of an accident, doesn't he ? ... and that an abduction was staged and her body disposed of
The fact that a cadaver dog alerted in that apartment lends plausibility to her death in the apartment and the fact that the window was opened from the inside might be said to lend plausibility to the suggestion that an abduction was staged
As to the parents disposing of their dead child's body, I can't think of anything that makes that part of his thesis plausible ... it seems incomprehensible to me that these clearly loving parents could carry out such a callous and cold hearted act
I have not read the book either.
I have seen it said that Dr Amaral decided on the 4th May that Madeleine had died accidentally in 5a and her parents covered it up by removing and hiding her body.
Then rather than following the evidence to find a perpetrator, he tried to find the evidence which matched his theory.
Is that correct – and is there a source to support it? the book?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 28, 2014, 09:25:31 PM
I have seen it said that Dr Amaral decided on the 4th May that Madeleine had died accidentally in 5a and her parents covered it up by removing and hiding her body.
Then rather than following the evidence to find a perpetrator, he tried to find the evidence which matched his theory.
Is that correct – and is there a source to support it? the book?
I don't think there is evidence to suggest Amaral and the Portuguese police did not 'follow evidence' ... there was no evidence of abduction that they could 'follow' ... was there ?
There is certainly evidence that many 'sightings' all over the world were followed up ( sightings that were relentlessly generated by the McCann's 'awareness campaign ) That element of the investigation must have been a huge distraction and taken up a great deal of police time
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Mr Gray on April 28, 2014, 09:39:22 PM
I am not familiar with Amaral's thesis except in the broadest terms, not having read his book
Broadly speaking, then, he believes Madeleine died in apartment 5A as a result of an accident, doesn't he ? ... and that an abduction was staged and her body disposed of
The fact that a cadaver dog alerted in that apartment lends plausibility to her death in the apartment and the fact that the window was opened from the inside might be said to lend plausibility to the suggestion that an abduction was staged
As to the parents disposing of their dead child's body, I can't think of anything that makes that part of his thesis plausible ... it seems incomprehensible to me that these clearly loving parents could carry out such a callous and cold hearted act
you have stated that the window was opened from the inside...you are stating that as a fact...that's rubbish and therefore weakens your whole argument
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Alfred R Jones on April 28, 2014, 10:01:47 PM
But taking the dead body of a beloved child and 'disposing' of it ?
I just can't imagine it
Amaral's thesis involves the body being hidden somewhere like the beach, then retrieved some weeks later to be transported in the hire car. This was apparently achieved by a couple who were at the centre of intense media scrutiny at the time.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: pegasus on April 28, 2014, 10:02:57 PM
Perhaps the most remarkable thing about Mr Amaral's theory is that IMO, and I base my opinion (which may be wrong) on his book plus film plus especially interviews, he seems to think that it was only after the commencement of the last check, that his proposed discovery and physical relocation happened?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: pathfinder73 on April 28, 2014, 10:07:13 PM
Perhaps the most remarkable thing about Amaral's theory is that IMO, and I base my opinion (which may be wrong) on his book plus film plus especially interviews, he seems to think that it was only after the commencement of the last check, that his proposed discovery and physical relocation happened?
It doesn't cover the minimum 90 minutes does it? Only 45 minutes at the most?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: pegasus on April 28, 2014, 10:24:57 PM
I don't think there is evidence to suggest Amaral and the Portuguese police did not 'follow evidence' ... there was no evidence of abduction that they could 'follow' ... was there ?
There is certainly evidence that many 'sightings' all over the world were followed up ( sightings that were relentlessly generated by the McCann's 'awareness campaign ) That element of the investigation must have been a huge distraction and taken up a great deal of police time
Unfortunately there is provenance that evidence was not followed through or in many cases ignored.
For example, the infamous CCTV which may or may not have picked up the man seen by the Smith family.
The cigarette butts reported to the police in the stairwell which overlooked apartment 5a which were not collected for forensic examination.
I’m not altogether sure that the alleged sightings did take up a great deal of police time, and I know that many were not followed up.
The Drs McCann lawyers were given files in 2010 which had been marked as ‘not relevant to the investigation’.
These contained photographs and videos of children which had been filed but never shown to the Drs McCann.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Alfred R Jones on April 28, 2014, 10:43:53 PM
The Drs McCann lawyers were given files in 2010 which had been marked as ‘not relevant to the investigation’. These contained photographs and videos of children which had been filed but never shown to the Drs McCann.
... who likewise agreed that the photos/videos were not of their clients' disappeared child and were not relevant.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: pathfinder73 on April 28, 2014, 11:12:59 PM
... who likewise agreed that the photos/videos were not of their clients' disappeared child and were not relevant.
Whether or not there was anything of relevance was not tested when it should have been. Dr Amaral's theory that Madeleine was dead allowed Mr Paiva to neglect his duty which was to continue investigating Madeleine McCann's disappearance.
Quote - Mr Paiva gave evidence at a legal hearing over a controversial book, written by his former boss, Goncalo Amaral.
He admitted that Mr Amaral's insistence that Madeleine died on May 3, 2007, meant the police investigation had failed to consider other options.
Mrs Duarte said they had not investigated any tip-offs since the case was officially shelved, in July 2008, when the McCanns were cleared as official suspects in the investigation.
She said information had continued to pour in from potential witnesses and even from other police forces in Europe, but was ignored, even when the clues including photographs of girls who looked like Madeleine.
The lawyer said: 'Some of them are very, very similar to Madeleine. But Kate and Gerry had never been shown them.
'There was information from Leicestershire Police, French police, Spanish police, and again nothing was done about it. - end Quote
Would you investigate a routine change in a missing child case or believe the parents?
Agreed routine changes are interesting (I assume you mean not going for evening playground visit near tapas) however the main points of interest IMO are the time the missing person was last seen ok, and the time the physical transition was made from the apartment/garden to some other location. The account of the 9.05ish check is likely IMO to be true (that's not automatically believing anyone, its worked out IMO scientifically) which IMO pins one of those two times.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 29, 2014, 12:22:08 AM
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: pegasus on April 29, 2014, 12:34:43 AM
In the files there are probably only 3 sightings within PDL (the JT sighting the Smith sighting and the golfbag sighting, all on the relevant night and in the relevant town) and there are many hundreds of sightings elsewhere all around the world, covering every continent except maybe Antarctica. If the PJ had assigned equal time to each sighting, their investigation would have been 99% outside PDL, roving the entire world, and less than 1% within PDL.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: pathfinder73 on April 29, 2014, 01:22:12 AM
Agreed routine changes are interesting (I assume you mean not going for evening playground visit near tapas) however the main points of interest IMO are the time the missing person was last seen ok, and the time the physical transition was made from the apartment/garden to some other location. The account of the 9.05ish check is likely IMO to be true (that's not automatically believing anyone, its worked out IMO scientifically) which IMO pins one of those two times.
The routine change period is indeed very interesting with the many contradictions in testimonies, incriminating allegations and cadaver alerts then it must be properly investigated. The 9:05 check is interesting for being both the first visual check of the week and the last time Madeleine is seen. I would think any routine changes would be at the top of any anomaly list to be investigated. Maybe it's been put to the bottom of this list >@@(*&)
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: pegasus on April 29, 2014, 01:55:39 AM
The routine change period is indeed very interesting with the many contradictions in testimonies, incriminating allegations and cadaver alerts then it must be properly investigated. The 9:05 check is interesting for being both the first visual check of the week and the last time Madeleine is seen. I would think any routine changes would be at the top of any anomaly list to be investigated. Maybe it's been put to the bottom of this list >@@(*&)
Changes of routine can be found IMO already from the first Sunday (29th).
IMO Mr Amaral's main theory has the location and status of the child at the time of the approx 9.05 check as follows : Location: north bedroom. Status: alive and well.
Although I don't agree with every part Mr Amaral's theory, and I work it out independently, I also think Location: north bedroom. Status: alive and well.
What is your opinion re approx 9.05pm? Location: ? Status:?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: drummer on April 29, 2014, 09:33:33 AM
GA: … in an advanced state of decomposition, at least it’s a hypothesis. Therefore it’s a question of a deep freezer, or something similar, and there we had to search for it and that was what we were doing. This means, the contacts that they had, where they went, where they were seen… There are people who say that they were seen entering an apartment block near the cemetery in Praia da Luz. At that point in time we weren’t able to detect which apartment they entered, who lived there, because it’s also a bit complicated because you have to understand it’s a tourist area and often it’s not known who the apartment belongs to.
JP: Of course, of course…
GA: Who lives there, for how long they live there, so all of that was being worked upon. To try to understand the support…
JP: If someone discovered a deep freezer in the area and…
GA: If it was actually a deep freezer, it doesn’t exist anymore now.
Credible, my bottom.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Brietta on April 29, 2014, 10:01:34 AM
In the files there are probably only 3 sightings within PDL (the JT sighting the Smith sighting and the golfbag sighting, all on the relevant night and in the relevant town) and there are many hundreds of sightings elsewhere all around the world, covering every continent except maybe Antarctica. If the PJ had assigned equal time to each sighting, their investigation would have been 99% outside PDL, roving the entire world, and less than 1% within PDL.
I think it is important to establish that the ‘golf bag sighting’ does not appear to be substantiated in the files and appears to be a bone of contention between two friends.
Quote - Walley is currently at her address in Portugal and is unaware that Grainger has called in with this information. Grainger thinks Walley will fall out with her if or when the police make contact with her over this. Grainger is more than willing to speak with you if you wish to contact her. – end Quote http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/ASSORTED_SIGHTINGS_14.htm
Service Information Date: 2008-05-02 To: The Head of the Criminal Investigation From: Inspector Joao Carlos Subject: Supposed sighting According to the results of the previous information, received by email we can infer that this was a third party intervention, in other words, the person who reported the sighting was not the person who saw it. Patricia Grainger alleged that her friend Rosemary Walley who lives in Portugal, concretely in Praia da Luz at about 8 -10 minutes from the apartment Madeleine disappeared from. According to Grainger, her friend Walley, on the night of the disappearance or on the following morning, she does not make this clear, when she was in her garden, supposedly facing the room, she saw a man wearing a sports jacket carrying a rucksack/bag. He was accompanied by a Portuguese woman (it is not clear how she deduced the nationality). The couple got into a mini van and left the scene. The information is laconical, imprecise and quite vague, there is no reference to the British child or to any other child. Once we got hold of Rosemary Walley's telephone number and when we spoke to her and told her the reason for our phone call she was speechless. She said that she did not know anything about the disappearance nor about the sighting, saying that the information provided by her friend was fictitious or a misunderstanding. She added that she had told her friend that on the night of the disappearance she saw a man and a woman, the former was carrying a golf bag on his shoulder and that she said this bag, in jocular terms and out of pure derision be linked to the missing girl. That it was a joke made in bad taste as she did not see anything that could conclude or infer this sense, it was a normal couple, nothing more. With no more to report Inspector Joao Carlos Pages 2969 - 2970 are in English: http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/ASSORTED_SIGHTINGS_14.htm
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: pathfinder73 on April 29, 2014, 10:36:58 AM
In the absence of any other detailed non-abduction theory about what happened to Madeleine McCann I thought it might be worth re-visiting Amaral's thesis. With all that we now know about the case, is his thesis at all credible? Does it hang together coherently as a plausible account of events? Is there any evidence that those currently investigating the case are using his thesis as a basis for their investigations?
For Gonçalo Amaral's thesis to work he would have needed to have gathered substantial evidence and that is where it falls down. The accidental death, the removal of the body at such short notice, the refrigeration and subsequent disposal, all conducted under the noses of the worlds Press and media.
Certainly there are inconsistencies in versions of events and other little indicators which Amaral points to as being part of some great conspiracy but without hard evidence none of it can ever amount to anything more than a theory, his theory.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Carana on April 29, 2014, 04:28:21 PM
For Gonçalo Amaral's thesis to work he would have needed to have gathered substantial evidence and that is where it falls down. The accidental death, the removal of the body at such short notice, the refrigeration and subsequent disposal, all conducted under the noses of the worlds Press and media.
Certainly there are inconsistencies in versions of events and other little indicators which Amaral points to as being part of some great conspiracy but without hard evidence none of it can ever amount to anything more than a theory, his theory.
A shoehorning approach to police investigations, seemingly. It's only 40 years since Portugal officially became a democracy...Hopefully, more modern policing is slowly being implemented.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: jassi on April 29, 2014, 04:49:23 PM
A shoehorning approach to police investigations, seemingly. It's only 40 years since Portugal officially became a democracy...Hopefully, more modern policing is slowly being implemented.
The Metropolitan Police has been in existence since 1829 and still seems to have major problems, so 40 years would seem nothing by comparison.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Cornelius on April 29, 2014, 04:51:49 PM
A shoehorning approach to police investigations, seemingly. It's only 40 years since Portugal officially became a democracy...Hopefully, more modern policing is slowly being implemented.
Dictatorship does not equal backward as you seem to suggest. Whilst one would not wish to have lived under it Stalin took Russia from a nation of peasants to putting the first man in space in less than 40 years. In Switzerland they had brotherly love - they had 500 years of democracy and peace, and what did that produce? The cuckoo clock. Graham Greene The Third Man.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Mr Gray on April 29, 2014, 05:13:33 PM
Dictatorship does not equal backward as you seem to suggest. Whilst one would not wish to have lived under it Stalin took Russia from a nation of peasants to putting the first man in space in less than 40 years. In Switzerland they had brotherly love - they had 500 years of democracy and peace, and what did that produce? The cuckoo clock. Graham Greene The Third Man.
And where would you rather live...Russia or Switzerland
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Lace on April 30, 2014, 01:52:50 PM
Why would the McCann's put the body of Madeleine in the wardrobe?
If what Amaral says happened, then Madeleine would have been found behind the sofa, so why would someone take her from there and put her in then wardrobe?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: pathfinder73 on April 30, 2014, 03:45:53 PM
Why would the McCann's put the body of Madeleine in the wardrobe?
If what Amaral says happened, then Madeleine would have been found behind the sofa, so why would someone take her from there and put her in then wardrobe?
Because the sofa was found pushed up against the wall.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Carana on April 30, 2014, 04:03:01 PM
Dictatorship does not equal backward as you seem to suggest. Whilst one would not wish to have lived under it Stalin took Russia from a nation of peasants to putting the first man in space in less than 40 years. In Switzerland they had brotherly love - they had 500 years of democracy and peace, and what did that produce? The cuckoo clock. Graham Greene The Third Man.
I don't see the connection between that and more modern policing methods...
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Lace on April 30, 2014, 04:40:15 PM
So what you are saying is, the McCann's found Madeleine behind the sofa, took Madeleine hid her in the wardrobe and pushed the sofa against the wall.
The wardrobe was searched though wasn't it? so what was the point of doing that?
If the GNR hadn't double-checked behind the sofa for a potentially non-missing child before calling in the PJ, they'd be pretty stupid, wouldn't they? These were photos taken late at night, presumably after McCanns and others had left as there's no trace of them in any of the photos.
So who, logically, was the last to move the sofa prior to those photos being taken?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: pathfinder73 on April 30, 2014, 05:14:19 PM
So what you are saying is, the McCann's found Madeleine behind the sofa, took Madeleine hid her in the wardrobe and pushed the sofa against the wall.
The wardrobe was searched though wasn't it? so what was the point of doing that?
In case one of their friends came round. Eddie was sniffing outside the parents bedroom not the patio lounge entrance. Exit possibility: wardrobe - bedroom door - balcony. Somebody coming. Hide in flower bed. After they've gone. Moved from flower bed.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Teecah on April 30, 2014, 05:30:55 PM
Quote
Then, while his colleague remained in the hall, and the others were in the living room, the witness went through the entire apartment. He opened all the cupboards in the bedrooms, living room and kitchen and checked under the beds and inside the washing machine. He did not see the fridge.
The colleague:
Quote
Then, with his colleague, he searched the apartment. He opened all the cupboards of the bedrooms, living room and kitchen and he checked under the beds and in the fridge. He did not see the washing machine.
Strange innit?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Cornelius on April 30, 2014, 05:58:03 PM
In case one of their friends came round. Eddie was sniffing outside the parents bedroom not the patio lounge entrance. Exit possibility: wardrobe - bedroom door - balcony. Somebody coming. Hide in flower bed. After they've gone. Moved from flower bed.
Don't you think the garden area would have been searched in case Madeleine was hiding there?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: slartibartfast on April 30, 2014, 06:48:53 PM
I suppose if abduction hadn't been the word of the moment, more searching may have taken place...
That's true, they were searching for a kid who had supposedly woke and wandered and not one who was dead. But wait a moment, wasn't Kate convinced from the first moment that she had been taken and later ended up searching in dumpsters...
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Cornelius on April 30, 2014, 07:11:25 PM
I doubt you are that dim that you cannot work it out.
I haven't a clue what you're talking about. I raised the issue as to whether modern policing methods were likely to be implemented overnight in the aftermath of overthrowing a fascist state.
My view is that no state can throw out the whole of the old guard overnight, nor even the juniors who have grown up with it.
It's one thing to change the legal system and another to implement change in the culture of institutions. The latter takes even more time and investment.
Portgual seems to be moving forward, and it is no doubt not an easy task, particularly in a difficult economic climate. I see positive changes compared to even a few years ago, but everything takes time and I wish them well.
But I still don't understand your point.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Carana on April 30, 2014, 07:58:16 PM
No country is perfect, is it? Hopefully, freedom of the press in mature democracies is to strive to ensure accountability, not to cover up for the lack of it.
Absolutely not. I do get a bit fed up of Britain being held up as the epitome of a democratic society. Our press seems pretty corrupt too.
I wouldn't say we're much better or worse than other western countries.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Cornelius on May 01, 2014, 09:47:20 AM
I haven't a clue what you're talking about. I raised the issue as to whether modern policing methods were likely to be implemented overnight in the aftermath of overthrowing a fascist state.
My view is that no state can throw out the whole of the old guard overnight, nor even the juniors who have grown up with it.
It's one thing to change the legal system and another to implement change in the culture of institutions. The latter takes even more time and investment.
Portgual seems to be moving forward, and it is no doubt not an easy task, particularly in a difficult economic climate. I see positive changes compared to even a few years ago, but everything takes time and I wish them well.
But I still don't understand your point.
Then my own presumption about you was sadly incorrect. You clearly think 34 years was not long enough?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: colombosstogey on May 01, 2014, 03:43:39 PM
As to the parents disposing of their dead child's body, I can't think of anything that makes that part of his thesis plausible ... it seems incomprehensible to me that these clearly loving parents could carry out such a callous and cold hearted act
Michael Kumars mother cried abduction and left her dead sons body in a wood to be mauled/eaten by wild animals.
The McCanns are not normal people though are they, they are both doctors and used to dealing with death.
Whether or not they could carry it out is another thing.
However, I dont think they would have callously dumped her body somewhere. There was no rush to do so if they needed to.
They were not suspects they cried abduction no screamed abduction and the police were looking at that avenue and whether she had wondered off.
They could have moved her or someone could have for them. Its not far from Portugual to UK about 2 hours flight after all.
who is to say really how someone would deal with it self preservation is very strong in a human beings make up.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 01, 2014, 03:50:13 PM
Michael Kumars mother cried abduction and left her dead sons body in a wood to be mauled/eaten by wild animals.
The McCanns are not normal people though are they, they are both doctors and used to dealing with death.
Whether or not they could carry it out is another thing.
However, I dont think they would have callously dumped her body somewhere. There was no rush to do so if they needed to.
They were not suspects they cried abduction no screamed abduction and the police were looking at that avenue and whether she had wondered off.
They could have moved her or someone could have for them. Its not far from Portugual to UK about 2 hours flight after all.
who is to say really how someone would deal with it self preservation is very strong in a human beings make up.
So... let's see. After recuperating the body from the beach in the spotlight of the world's media, they find a kindly hitherto unknown local to store it in their freezer for a month or more. As one does. They then ask for it back and move it around in their car for some reason. They then change their minds and decide that it's far easier to get someone to agree to carry it in a suitcase on an easyJet flight back to the UK past airport x-rays and sniffer dogs.
Hmmm.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 01, 2014, 07:15:46 PM
So... let's see. After recuperating the body from the beach in the spotlight of the world's media, they find a kindly hitherto unknown local to store it in their freezer for a month or more. As one does. They then ask for it back and move it around in their car for some reason. They then change their minds and decide that it's far easier to get someone to agree to carry it in a suitcase on an easyJet flight back to the UK past airport x-rays and sniffer dogs.
Hmmm.
then after pulling off the perfect crime leaving no evidence lobby the uk police to open up the case again so they can be re investgated
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: pegasus on May 01, 2014, 09:36:03 PM
As I said IMO at about 9.05pm or 9.10pm it was north bedroom alive and well. However looking at your hypothesis for that time - presumably you mean south bedroom, left wardrobe? Which shelf?
(BTW Mr Amaral's video seems to mistakenly reconstruct the pile of clothes one shelf higher than in PJ photos, and the bag one shelf higher than in PJ photos).
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: ferryman on May 01, 2014, 09:42:17 PM
... and the fact that the window was opened from the inside might be said to lend plausibility to the suggestion that an abduction was staged
You obviously missed the video clip of Peter Mac with Pat Brown opening the apartment 5a windows from the outside ...
What fact ... ?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: pegasus on May 01, 2014, 09:46:30 PM
... the video clip of Peter Mac with Pat Brown opening the apartment 5a windows from the outside ...
or much better, the video by Heriberto, showing complete opening from outside of a similar window and shutter, a simple three-stage method. IMO Mr Amaral was mistaken when in he concluded the window and shutter could not be opened from outside.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 01, 2014, 10:21:34 PM
As I said IMO at about 9.05pm or 9.10pm it was north bedroom alive and well. However looking at your hypothesis for that time - presumably you mean south bedroom, left wardrobe? Which shelf?
(BTW Mr Amaral's video seems to mistakenly reconstruct the pile of clothes one shelf higher than in PJ photos, and the bag one shelf higher than in PJ photos).
Clothes are on the shelf where Eddie sniffed and then alerted.
I suppose if abduction hadn't been the word of the moment, more searching may have taken place...
Having watched media reports of the search for a missing child in Edinburgh, I was struck by the way the police organised everything.
Names of volunteers were taken and areas to be searched were co-ordinated.
People with experience of searching for missing people were tasked with searching particular areas, and civilian teams walking in line were under supervision of professionals.
In this way no area was left unsearched and the chance of duplicating searches in one area was reduced considerably as a record was being kept. The police controlled and supervised every aspect of the search.
It is possible that the garden area outside 5a was searched by different teams or individuals.
It is possible it was omitted from the search.
In the absence of records such as those which must be in existence from the Edinburgh searches, we will never know.
I do not believe the fact that Madeleine's parents thought she had been abducted would necessarily affect a properly conducted police investigation. I believe the police on the ground would have borne the possibility of abduction in mind as well as considering all other options.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 02, 2014, 12:15:14 AM
So someone coming and "whoever" threw Madeleines body over the balcony to hide it in the flower bed? Is that what you are saying?
Holy mackerel, what an unpleasant imagination you have 8)-)))
Nobody was thrown over the balcony @)(++(* Eddie alerted to the flower bed below where a body was placed after descending the steps or he alerted to the broken branches that were collected as evidence in the flower bed - they fell down from above balcony IMO.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: pegasus on May 02, 2014, 01:17:52 AM
Clothes are on the shelf where Eddie sniffed and then alerted. (http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_p305OiLZRCU/TDw673LtfiI/AAAAAAAAIcY/LvMyX91MJ-0/s320/wardrobe.jpg)
That pair of photos illustrates that the shelf sniffed just before alert is the one with clothes pile. (However IMO at 9.05/9.10 all was well) Mr Amaral points to the same shelf. (A small error is he has placed the recreated pile of clothes represented by blue fabric one shelf too high, and the recreated bag one shelf too high and too far to the right). At 5 minutes 13 seconds in https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LvY3Ek6q8IM
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 02, 2014, 08:00:28 AM
Nobody was thrown over the balcony @)(++(* Eddie alerted to the flower bed below where a body was placed after descending the steps or he alerted to the broken branches that were collected as evidence in the flower bed - they fell down from above balcony IMO.
From the little information available on residual cadaver odour there is no way the scent would have lasted outside for three months
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: stephen25000 on May 02, 2014, 08:27:19 AM
read the post again....from the little information available...there was one study which I read that certainly indicated that theh scent would not last outside with wind and rain...
We certainly know what SY think of the alerts as they think maddie may still be alive and MccAnns are not suspects
Precisely what scents would persist would depend on the volatility and concentrations of the compounds involved and the degree of adsorption onto the surfaces where deposited. Don't you agree davel ?
As to SY please keep up, they also said she might be dead.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 02, 2014, 08:31:54 AM
Precisely what scents would persist would depend on the volatility and concentrations of the compounds involved and the degree of adsorption onto the surfaces where deposited. Don't you agree davel ?
As to SY please keep up, they also said she might be dead.
There are other factors which you have NOT considered...outside with wind and rain these scents would dissipate more quickly than if they were undisturbed..you would have to agree with that...the fact that SY have said she amy be alive means that they do not accept the dogs prove she is dead ..fact
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: stephen25000 on May 02, 2014, 08:36:20 AM
There are other factors which you have NOT considered...outside with wind and rain these scents would dissipate more quickly than if they were undisturbed..you would have to agree with that...the fact that SY have said she amy be alive means that they do not accept the dogs prove she is dead ..fact
It would depend on the relative solubilities in water and it's composition and the degree of exposure to the rainfall.
Meanwhile do you accept that SY accept Madeleine could have dies, and in the apartment >
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 02, 2014, 08:38:28 AM
It would depend on the relative solubilities in water and it's composition and the degree of exposure to the rainfall.
Meanwhile do you accept that SY accept Madeleine could have dies, and in the apartment >
Sop trying to sound clever..you don't...what you mean is if its pissing down the scent will be washed away...similar for wind... of course maddie MAY have died in the apt ...I have said this many times...its one of the possibilities
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: stephen25000 on May 02, 2014, 08:40:56 AM
Sop trying to sound clever..you don't...what you mean is if its pissing down the scent will be washed away...similar for wind... of course maddie MAY have died in the apt ...I have said this many times...its one of the possibilities
I am not trying to be clever davel, it's basic Chemistry.
By the way it's Madeleine.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 02, 2014, 09:49:59 AM
From the little information available on residual cadaver odour there is no way the scent would have lasted outside for three months
It would be interesting to hear Grime's opinion on this but we know that branches were collected and they were outside for more than 3 months. If a cadaver had contact with them how do you know Eddie didn't recognise the scent? They commented that the scent was fainter outside.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 02, 2014, 01:25:23 PM
It would be interesting to hear Grime's opinion on this but we know that branches were collected and they were outside for more than 3 months. If a cadaver had contact with them how do you know Eddie didn't recognise the scent? They commented that the scent was fainter outside.
Who commented because Grime said this....
'Based upon the dogs' behaviour, is it possible to distinguish between a strong signal and a weak signal'. The dogs' passive CSI alert provides an indication as per their training and does not vary. They only give an alert when they are 'positive' that the target of the odour is present and immediately accessible. If they had any doubts they would not give an alert.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Carew on May 02, 2014, 02:02:19 PM
Isn`t Mr Grime referring to the CSI dog`s passive alert............not Eddie, the EVR dog in that comment?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: ferryman on May 02, 2014, 02:08:53 PM
It would be interesting to hear Grime's opinion on this but we know that branches were collected and they were outside for more than 3 months. If a cadaver had contact with them how do you know Eddie didn't recognise the scent? They commented that the scent was fainter outside.
Grime himself scotched that one in his rogatory interview.
The dog does not distinguish between weak or strong scents.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 02, 2014, 02:09:02 PM
Isn`t Mr Grime referring to the CSI dog`s passive alert............not Eddie, the EVR dog in that comment?
could be ..is eddie any different
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 02, 2014, 02:11:53 PM
this is the whole answer...
Based upon the dogs' behaviour, is it possible to distinguish between a strong signal and a weak signal? The dogs' passive CSI alert provides an indication as per their training and does not vary. They only give an alert when they are 'positive' that the target of the odour is present and immediately accessible. If they had any doubts they would not give an alert. EVRD gives an alert by means of a vocal bark. The variations in the vocal alert can be explained by many reasons such as 'thirst' or 'lack of air due to effort'. Every alert can be subject to interpretation, it has to be confirmed. The signals of an alert are only just that. Once the alert has been given by the dog, it is up to the investigator/forensic scientist to locate, identify and scientifically provide the evidence of DNA, etc.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Carew on May 02, 2014, 02:21:31 PM
Yes, the EVRD is different. It`s been discussed before.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Carana on May 02, 2014, 03:09:20 PM
It would be interesting to hear Grime's opinion on this but we know that branches were collected and they were outside for more than 3 months. If a cadaver had contact with them how do you know Eddie didn't recognise the scent? They commented that the scent was fainter outside.
I had wondered at some point if she could have woken up and fallen over the balcony, but there doesn't seem to be anything to substantiate that.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 02, 2014, 03:11:31 PM
Yes, the EVRD is different. It`s been discussed before.
Why didn't they dig up the flower bed if the dog alerted
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Brietta on May 03, 2014, 01:13:34 PM
It is my opinion that Dr Amaral’s premise is seriously flawed for a number of reasons, but mainly I think that his dismissal of abduction by a stranger in favour of criminal behaviour by Madeleine’s parents and friends just doesn’t hold water for me.
For example: If there is no evidence of an abduction taking place neither is there evidence of death.
A death whether homicide or accident leaves a lot of evidence behind.
Abductions leave very little.
Technically, if a person is missing that equates with use of the term "abduction" irrespective of who the perpetrator might be. The amount of discussion which has taken place on this terminology is extraordinary. The debate isn't whether or not she was abducted but who abducted her and if she is dead or alive.
The maxim: “an absence of evidence is not evidence of absence” is perhaps applicable here.
The majority of abductions leave very little if any evidence. If a child is snatched it is unusual for it to be witnessed. For example child murderer Robert Black abducted and killed little girls over a period of many years and was only apprehended when an alert person saw a little girl passing a van and vanishing, took the registration and reported it to the police. http://www.murderpedia.org/male.B/b/black-robert.htm
“All I could see were her little feet standing next to the man's. Suddenly they vanished and I saw him making movements as if he were trying to stuff something under the dashboard. He got into the van, reversed up the driveway the child had just come from and sped off towards Edinburgh.
David Herkes had the presence of mind to take the vans registration number, and then quickly rang the police. Police cars were promptly on the scene and the van's description was radioed to officers in the area.
Herkes remembers what happened next: "I was standing near the spot where the child had been abducted, briefing the police and the girl's distraught father about what had happened. Suddenly I saw the van again and shouted 'That's him'. The officer dashed into the road and the van swerved to avoid him before coming to a halt.” http://www.crimelibrary.com/serial_killers/predators/black/blood_8.html
But for that sighting and intervention there would have been no evidence of abduction other than a missing child. If Black’s MO had been followed, there might eventually have been evidence of death, although not necessarily.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: John on May 03, 2014, 06:00:27 PM
In all honesty I do think that Amaral was influenced by the Cipriano case. He genuinely thought that he was investigating another case of parents being involved in a childs demise which because of the huge pressure on him resulted in a sort of tunnel vision scenario.
I believe he wasn't up to coordinating the Madeleine McCann case for so many reasons and should never have been given the job. By the time the Portuguese authorities worked this all out it was too late...the damage was done.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Carana on May 03, 2014, 06:30:56 PM
In all honesty I do think that Amaral was influenced by the Cipriano case. He genuinely thought that he was investigating another case of parents being involved in a childs demise which because of the huge pressure on him resulted in a sort of tunnel vision scenario.
I believe he wasn't up to coordinating the Madeleine McCann case for so many reasons and should never have been given the job. By the time the Portuguese authorities worked this all out it was too late...the damage was done.
I don't always agree with you, John, but on this point I do.
Almost... as I don't agree that anything that could be construed as a confession of any kind in dubious circumstances in the absence of any verifiable corroborating evidence means anything at all. I'm aware that we totally disagree on this. In at least one case that comes to mind, the police attempted to double-check whether what was apparently a "confession" was even probable. No such thing happened in the Cipriano case. I can't think of any term other than shoe-horning in that case.
ETA: And quite possibly an attempt to replicate a scenario that had incredibly led to convictions in the McCann case.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: sadie on May 03, 2014, 06:32:45 PM
The business of stating that the Smiths confirmed his theory that Gerry was Smithman and he was taking a dead Madeleine down to the little beach to bury her is a nonsense. imo
That beach vanishes at high tide with water, IIRC, about 2 feet deep over it, splashing in and moving the sand underneath it ... as tides do
Yet he goes on to say that the Mccanns removed the body and took it elsewhere.
What a load of rubbish. Does he think we have no brains? Or didn't he bother to check the high water conditions?
If Smithman was going down to that beach, then he was going to meet a boat ... or use a boat already there. He was going to use the smaller boat to rendezvous with a bigger boat, possibly just over the horizon. imo
And Gerry would not have had the local knowledhge and friends out there, or ability, to do such a thing.
Smithman was NOT Gerry
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 03, 2014, 06:34:42 PM
In all honesty I do think that Amaral was influenced by the Cipriano case. He genuinely thought that he was investigating another case of parents being involved in a childs demise which because of the huge pressure on him resulted in a sort of tunnel vision scenario.
I believe he wasn't up to coordinating the Madeleine McCann case for so many reasons and should never have been given the job. By the time the Portuguese authorities worked this all out it was too late...the damage was done.
agreed
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Brietta on May 03, 2014, 08:09:42 PM
In all honesty I do think that Amaral was influenced by the Cipriano case. He genuinely thought that he was investigating another case of parents being involved in a childs demise which because of the huge pressure on him resulted in a sort of tunnel vision scenario.
I believe he wasn't up to coordinating the Madeleine McCann case for so many reasons and should never have been given the job. By the time the Portuguese authorities worked this all out it was too late...the damage was done.
Agreed ~ and he must have been distracted and distraught at being made Arguido on the 4th May.
Under those circumstances, and given the lack of expertise he and his team had in cases of missing children I think the Portuguese authorities were careless in their expectation of what was expected of him. I think he just worked the case which was given to him, someone higher up the chain hadn't thought it through.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Carana on May 03, 2014, 08:20:52 PM
Agreed ~ and he must have been distracted and distraught at being made Arguido on the 4th May.
Under those circumstances, and given the lack of expertise he and his team had in cases of missing children I think the Portuguese authorities were careless in their expectation of what was expected of him. I think he just worked the case which was given to him, someone higher up the chain hadn't thought it through.
For some reason, his own arguidoship seems to have been shoved under the carpet for quite a while, even though it happened on the very day that the PJ was called in on this case. That must have been stressful. I don't, however, recall him mentioning that in either his book, his "documentary", nor in any of his interviews.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: John on May 03, 2014, 08:41:57 PM
Agreed ~ and he must have been distracted and distraught at being made Arguido on the 4th May.
Under those circumstances, and given the lack of expertise he and his team had in cases of missing children I think the Portuguese authorities were careless in their expectation of what was expected of him. I think he just worked the case which was given to him, someone higher up the chain hadn't thought it through.
Exactly what I was thinking and add to that the civil case brought by his brother and you have a very worried Coordinator. I think that he was completely out of his depth but I don't believe there was anyone any better to replace him at that time.
Had he been a British police officer he would have been put on gardening leave (for Luz' benefit - he would have been suspended).
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 25, 2014, 05:33:47 PM
"One of the Ocean Club tourists states having heard Gerald McCann saying on the telephone that there were paedophile networks in Portugal, and that it was they who were responsible for Madeleine’s abduction. Absolutely astonishing! Just a few hours after his daughter’s disappearance, the father already knows who is guilty!" (TOTL)
Who was this witness? "They've Taken Her!" >@@(*&)
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 25, 2014, 05:55:27 PM
"One of the Ocean Club tourists states having heard Gerald McCann saying on the telephone that there were paedophile networks in Portugal, and that it was they who were responsible for Madeleine’s abduction. Absolutely astonishing! Just a few hours after his daughter’s disappearance, the father already knows who is guilty!" (TOTL)
Who was this witness? "They've Taken Her!" >@@(*&)
Yup, I've always thought that the 'They' bit meant 'It was paedos wot dunnit'.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: pegasus on May 25, 2014, 10:50:33 PM
Thanks Pegasus. Man that is quick to blame a paedo gang network. They've been watching us for days! They've taken her! But Smithman had no getaway car.
"about 23.00 hrs, Mr McKenzie approached the McCann's apartment from the bushes at the rear of the apartment.
I was looking in the little gardens on the poolside of that block, I was in the end garden when I heard a male voice, he sounded distraught his voice cracking with emotion. I looked to see who I now know to be Gerry McCann stood above me on the balcony/patio about 3 metres away speaking on a mobile phone. I cannot recall his exact words but I got the impression that he was speaking to perhaps a family member or someone he was very close to due to the nature of his conversation.
He said something along the lines of there being Paedophile gangs in Portugal and that they had abducted Madeleine. I was so shocked by this, having originally thought that she had just wandered off.
I had looked up by now and we actually made eye contact, his conversation did not change at all when he realised that I was there. I felt as if I were intruding on a private moment and so I left the garden at that point."
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: pegasus on May 26, 2014, 01:45:56 AM
Yes the witness was not in the alleyway but in in the actual garden of 5A.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Eleanor on May 26, 2014, 09:30:38 AM
It is not at all surprising to me that the immediate thought of the father of a missing child was that paedophiles might well be involved.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: jassi on May 26, 2014, 09:55:09 AM
They'd never previously given it a thought, then immediately after the event, he's suddenly knowledgeable about paedophile gangs in Portugal.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: slartibartfast on May 26, 2014, 09:55:59 AM
It is not at all surprising to me that the immediate thought of the father of a missing child was that paedophiles might well be involved.
I agree, especially in view of the fact that most abducted little girls have been the victims of a paedaphile in the past. I also believe that most members of the public would have thought exactly the same on first hearing the news about Madeleine. I know I did.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Eleanor on May 26, 2014, 10:12:54 AM
I agree, especially in view of the fact that most abducted little girls have been the victims of a paedaphile in the past. I also believe that most members of the public would have thought exactly the same on first hearing the news about Madeleine. I know I did.
So did I. I just hoped it wasn't true.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: slartibartfast on May 26, 2014, 10:15:18 AM
I agree, especially in view of the fact that most abducted little girls have been the victims of a paedaphile in the past. I also believe that most members of the public would have thought exactly the same on first hearing the news about Madeleine. I know I did.
Wrong.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 26, 2014, 10:26:17 AM
I still hope that Madeleine was taken to be adopted by a family. But that's the difference between you and me. I hope for the best while you hope for the worst. In fact it is the major difference between the two sides.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: jassi on May 26, 2014, 10:41:00 AM
I still hope that Madeleine was taken to be adopted by a family. But that's the difference between you and me. I hope for the best while you hope for the worst. In fact it is the major difference between the two sides.
I would have thought those who pursue the idea of abduction by paedophile are the ones looking for the worst outcome.
Nothing good would come out of that scenario.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Eleanor on May 26, 2014, 10:46:51 AM
At which point and using what method was the McCann's word thoroughly tested by SY? You are just guessing.
The only reference I recall is a forensic examination of the timeline. What forensic examination? Using which method? A pen and paper? A high tech software program? Certainly not a real live actual reconstruction. After all that would have been far too risky for the McCann's chums.
Do you have any idea or will your answer just be another supposition?
If you really believe that SY did not thoroughly investigate the parents as their No. 1 priority, but just took their word for it that they did not dispose of their dead child's body then you are being very disingenuous IMO.
The family are always the first people to be investigated so that they can be ruled in or ruled out at the very beginning. I thought everyone knew that.
If you can at tell me how a one off reconstruction could be carried out and how the PJ would deal with the problem that only approximate timelines were able to be given by 10 different people - I would be very glad to hear it.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 26, 2014, 12:53:56 PM
If you really believe that SY did not thoroughly investigate the parents as their No. 1 priority, but just took their word for it that they did not dispose of their dead child's body then you are being very disingenuous IMO.
The family are always the first people to be investigated so that they can be ruled in or ruled out at the very beginning. I thought everyone knew that.
If you can at tell me how a one off reconstruction could be carried out and how the PJ would deal with the problem that only approximate timelines were able to be given by 10 different people - I would be very glad to hear it.
They'll be last to be thoroughly investigated in this high profile media driven case after all other possibilities are first ruled out. But I can conclude that Smithman is being tracked from the wasteland to the church vicinity in these new searches to hopefully find clues into the disappearance of Madeleine or Maddy as she presented herself to the nanny Charlotte Pennington.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 26, 2014, 02:02:17 PM
I believe what is supported by evidence. As the archiving report found no evidence to show that the mccanns were involved in any crime...as SY have declared that they are not suspects...as they have never been arrested or charged....I believe they are not criminally involved in Maddies disappearance..
What do you base your beliefs on
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 26, 2014, 02:40:50 PM
They're tracking Smithman right now for evidence and Amaral was tracking him when he was removed from the case.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Carana on May 26, 2014, 03:49:52 PM
Back to the OP: is Amaral's "thesis" credible or not?
What exactly is it? It seems to vary depending on whether it is what he states in his book, his film or his numerous interviews.
Once that is sorted (if ever): - what exactly makes it "credible"? - what evidence actually supports whatever his hypothesis actually is? - what evidence is there that supports the idea that he is a lone "truthseeker" thwarted by powers beyond him?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 26, 2014, 04:00:48 PM
Back to the OP: is Amaral's "thesis" credible or not?
What exactly is it? It seems to vary depending on whether it is what he states in his book, his film or his numerous interviews.
Once that is sorted (if ever): - what exactly makes it "credible"? - what evidence actually supports whatever his hypothesis actually is? - what evidence is there that supports the idea that he is a lone "truthseeker" thwarted by powers beyond him?
The fact that the archiving report said that there was no evidence to link the McCanns with any crime means that amaral has nothing of value to support his thesis .....the fact that the new investigation does not consider the parents suspects reinforces this
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 26, 2014, 05:44:40 PM
Amaral should never have been on the case as John pointed out yesterday ... he was an arguido ...in the uk he would have been suspended
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: icabodcrane on May 26, 2014, 07:18:36 PM
Chief Inspector Olegario Sousa made a public statement that the McCanns were not being treated as suspects even though it was blatently not true
I think he did that to keep a lid on the already explosive media situation
It is quite possible that Scotland have taken a similar approach, knowing full well the importance of restraining media hysteria
... especially in this case, where a feeding frenzy will ensue at the first whiff of sharkbait
I think it is a ridiculous assumption
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: pegasus on May 26, 2014, 09:18:21 PM
IMO his theory is good on some points, and wrong on many other points. Just one example of each, strictly just IMO of course, based on the theory as presented in the Verdade film Correct about mode and approximate time of exiting north bedroom. Incorrect about mode and time of exiting apartment.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: pegasus on June 09, 2014, 12:59:39 AM
My comments on a recent interview with Gonçalo Amaral http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2784.msg159868#msg159868
"There was no assault in that house" Correct. And no intruder ever entered.
"'fake and staged' referring to the current theory being pursued by the British police" The UK investigation is not staged, it genuinely intends to solve the case, but like Mr Amaral's, has some illogical assumptions. "the idea of there being a 'thief who was frightened by the child' is a scenario created solely for the media". Incorrect. Here both Mr Amaral and Mr Redwood have not realised that a burglar opening the window to enter would disturb the child and simultaneously the child would disturb the burglar and therefore he would never get as far as climbing in, and is not the person who removes anything..
"...there wasn't missing a TV, a camera or money ..." Correct. (Although if there had been no-one home, those items would be gone, simple insurance claims)
"... It is a ploy to make us forget what exists." No. It is a situation where neither Mr A nor Mr R have worked through what would happen if someone opened the window and what sequence would obviously follow and how that might lead to increased risk.
As usual, I might be wrong.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Benice on June 09, 2014, 01:13:19 AM
From Amaral's book.
The idea of a robbery gone wrong is not to be ruled out either. During the holidays, burglaries are not rare, and the police are not always informed, because hotels avoid spreading this kind of information. Even if the examination of apartment 5A reveals no trace of a break-in - contrary to what the parents insist and that Sky announced - we have to take stock of the petty crimes committed in the seaside resort and at the tourist complex. End quote
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: pegasus on June 09, 2014, 01:25:11 AM
Thanks Benice, that's good, so Mr Amaral did at least consider the possibility of interrupted burglary. I would like to sit for several hours at a pavement cafe with Mr R and Mr A (and some good portuguese food and beer of course) and ask them together to answer the simple question: if a burglar opened that window and shutter from outside, what would obviously happen next, step by step.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Truth on June 09, 2014, 02:46:08 AM
The abduction story is full of holes.
Experienced detectives can tell.
They probably didn't take it seriously at all.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: VIXTE on June 09, 2014, 02:51:35 AM
In past 7 years we had numerous experienced detectives speaking in the media and saying opposite. Why should we trust only one detective who BTW has a criminal record?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Montclair on June 09, 2014, 09:35:53 AM
Why do you continue to say that is was Gonçalo Amaral's thesis? The investigation was not carried out by one lone inspector and furthermore, it was done under the supervision of the judges from the Ministério Público, as is the procedure in all criminal investigations in Portugal. The conclusions in the report of 10 September 2007 were the conclusions of an investigation carried out by the Portuguese and British police at the time, not those of some "rogue" cop, as many of you like to think.
As GA pointed out in his book, the possibility of a burglary gone wrong was also considered and not thought to be valid.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Carana on June 09, 2014, 11:11:33 AM
Why do you continue to say that is was Gonçalo Amaral's thesis? The investigation was not carried out by one lone inspector and furthermore, it was done under the supervision of the judges from the Ministério Público, as is the procedure in all criminal investigations in Portugal. The conclusions in the report of 10 September 2007 were the conclusions of an investigation carried out by the Portuguese and British police at the time, not those of some "rogue" cop, as many of you like to think.
As GA pointed out in his book, the possibility of a burglary gone wrong was also considered and not thought to be valid.
Based on what?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: jassi on June 09, 2014, 11:19:27 AM
Based on the information available to them as the investigating police force, I imagine.
Wouldn't the investigation and exclusion of potential burglaries be in the files? If so, where? There are a few statements simply saying that people were aware of burglaries, but nothing to substantiate the exclusion of that scenario, nor anything to exclude any particular suspect that I have been able to find.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 09, 2014, 11:46:06 AM
Wouldn't the investigation and exclusion of potential burglaries be in the files? If so, where? There are a few statements simply saying that people were aware of burglaries, but nothing to substantiate the exclusion of that scenario, nor anything to exclude any particular suspect that I have been able to find.
They are paedo burglars aren't they?
Must be in the paedo files then.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: jassi on June 09, 2014, 11:48:23 AM
Wouldn't the investigation and exclusion of potential burglaries be in the files? If so, where? There are a few statements simply saying that people were aware of burglaries, but nothing to substantiate the exclusion of that scenario, nor anything to exclude any particular suspect that I have been able to find.
We know that the released files are far from complete, so presumably the 'missing' information is amongst that not released.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Brietta on June 09, 2014, 06:04:37 PM
We know that the released files are far from complete, so presumably the 'missing' information is amongst that not released.
I don't think the information is there because I do not think the necessary diligence was carried out. I think it unlikely that as full an investigation took place in 2007 into the culpability or clearing of the individuals of interest to the present inquiry as should have been merited.
The only game in town seems to have been Dr Amaral, the chief investigator’s theory that the parents were responsible.
This excluded all other avenues, as confirmed by Ricardo Paiva.
Snip Mr Paiva gave evidence at a legal hearing over a controversial book, written by his former boss, Goncalo Amaral.
He admitted that Mr Amaral's insistence that Madeleine died on May 3, 2007, meant the police investigation had failed to consider other options.
Mrs Duarte said they had not investigated any tip-offs since the case was officially shelved, in July 2008, when the McCanns were cleared as official suspects in the investigation.
She said information had continued to pour in from potential witnesses and even from other police forces in Europe, but was ignored, even when the clues including photographs of girls who looked like Madeleine.
I don't think the information is there because I do not think the necessary diligence was carried out. I think it unlikely that as full an investigation took place in 2007 into the culpability or clearing of the individuals of interest to the present inquiry as should have been merited.
The only game in town seems to have been Dr Amaral, the chief investigator’s theory that the parents were responsible.
This excluded all other avenues, as confirmed by Ricardo Paiva.
Snip Mr Paiva gave evidence at a legal hearing over a controversial book, written by his former boss, Goncalo Amaral.
He admitted that Mr Amaral's insistence that Madeleine died on May 3, 2007, meant the police investigation had failed to consider other options.
Mrs Duarte said they had not investigated any tip-offs since the case was officially shelved, in July 2008, when the McCanns were cleared as official suspects in the investigation.
She said information had continued to pour in from potential witnesses and even from other police forces in Europe, but was ignored, even when the clues including photographs of girls who looked like Madeleine.
I don't know how many times it must be said but Gonçalo Amaral was not the head investigator. In Portugal, the judges from the Ministério Público orientate investigations and give orders and authorisations to carry out any diligences. This is the same procedure in Spain, Italy and France. There were over a 100 policeman involved in the case and one coordinator did not make all of the decisions as to the orientation of the investigation. In Portugal, the police follow the evidence to see where it leads whereas, I'm beginning to wonder if SY decides before what has happened and then looks for evidence to fit the scenario.
As for the quote from Ricardo Paiva, he stated the contrary in the court room. He said that GA's book had no influence on the information received by the PJ afterwards, when the case had already been shelved. The tweet made from the court room by a British journalist, quoting Paiva, was incorrect but still so many McCann supportert keep on quoting it.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Benice on June 09, 2014, 11:47:25 PM
I don't know how many times it must be said but Gonçalo Amaral was not the head investigator. In Portugal, the judges from the Ministério Público orientate investigations and give orders and authorisations to carry out any diligences. This is the same procedure in Spain, Italy and France. There were over a 100 policeman involved in the case and one coordinator did not make all of the decisions as to the orientation of the investigation. In Portugal, the police follow the evidence to see where it leads whereas, I'm beginning to wonder if SY decides before what has happened and then looks for evidence to fit the scenario.
As for the quote from Ricardo Paiva, he stated the contrary in the court room. He said that GA's book had no influence on the information received by the PJ afterwards, when the case had already been shelved. The tweet made from the court room by a British journalist, quoting Paiva, was incorrect but still so many McCann supportert keep on quoting it.
Surely there must be one person in charge of the 'operational' side of the case. It wouldn't work if several people - all on the same level were making decisions. The Judge in the libel trial seemed to think that Amaral was No.1 and that others were his subordinates. The following quote appears to confirm that.
Quote
The Judge – Hierarchically, were you subordinated to Gonçalo Amaral? TA said that Gonçalo Amaral was the Coordinator and he was under him.
The Judge – Were you Number 2? TA says it can be said so. Unquote
IMO the big mistake Amaral made was that he decided on day one who the perpetrators were and then tried to shoehorn in 'evidence' to fit that one theory to the exclusion of anything else. His other big mistake IMO was not meeting or interviewing the McCanns himself. I still find that an incomprehensible decision on his part.
Another huge mistake imo was to order that a tail be put on the UK police when they arrived and to have their every move reported back to him - but to fail to put one on the McCanns when they hired a car. If he had done that - he would either have caught them redhanded or proved that they did not move Madeleine's body in the car. Think of how different things would have been if he had taken that rather obvious course of action - considering they were his only prime suspects.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Truth on June 10, 2014, 02:06:50 AM
doesnt matter anyway redmond is there now. in Pdl at the dig.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Mr Gray on June 10, 2014, 08:07:46 AM
I don't know how many times it must be said but Gonçalo Amaral was not the head investigator. In Portugal, the judges from the Ministério Público orientate investigations and give orders and authorisations to carry out any diligences. This is the same procedure in Spain, Italy and France. There were over a 100 policeman involved in the case and one coordinator did not make all of the decisions as to the orientation of the investigation. In Portugal, the police follow the evidence to see where it leads whereas, I'm beginning to wonder if SY decides before what has happened and then looks for evidence to fit the scenario.
As for the quote from Ricardo Paiva, he stated the contrary in the court room. He said that GA's book had no influence on the information received by the PJ afterwards, when the case had already been shelved. The tweet made from the court room by a British journalist, quoting Paiva, was incorrect but still so many McCann supportert keep on quoting it.
Amaral didnt understand what evidence was ...as the archiving statement confirms..
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Eleanor on June 10, 2014, 08:17:29 AM
We have been told time and time again that Goncalo Amaral was The Coordinator, and that there was no other Coordinator available, so he must have been In Charge. The Public Ministry can only view the information provided by The Coordinator.
If this is not true then exactly what is the job of The Coordinator?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Alfred R Jones on June 10, 2014, 08:17:47 AM
We have been told time and time again that Goncalo Amaral was The Coordinator, and that there was no other Coordinator available, so he must have been In Charge. The Public Ministry can only view the information provided by The Coordinator.
If this is not true then exactly what is the job of The Coordinator?
You obviously have no idea what a coordinator does in an investigation in Portugal, do you? There is a hierarchy, of course, but he is not a lead investigator as they exist in the UK. The coordinator normally does not go out on the field (although Gonçalo Amaral sometime did do this) and he does not do the actual investigation. He deals with the reports given to him by the inspectors, decides who goes out and for example which car they use, how much money they take, etc. but he does not decide which direction the investigation takes!!! Itis the evidence that leads the police not one chief inspector. I'm so tired of trying to tell you people how investigations are carried out in countries such as Portugal, Spain, Italy, France and you do not seem to want to understand.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Brietta on June 10, 2014, 10:51:54 AM
You obviously have no idea what a coordinator does in an investigation in Portugal, do you? There is a hierarchy, of course, but he is not a lead investigator as they exist in the UK. The coordinator normally does not go out on the field (although Gonçalo Amaral sometime did do this) and he does not do the actual investigation. He deals with the reports given to him by the inspectors, decides who goes out and for example which car they use, how much money they take, etc. but he does not decide which direction the investigation takes!!! Itis the evidence that leads the police not one chief inspector. I'm so tired of trying to tell you people how investigations are carried out in countries such as Portugal, Spain, Italy, France and you do not seem to want to understand.
Then why did Dr Amaral's theory, which is well documented not least by himself, take precedence over all other avenues of investigation? The ins and outs of Portuguese procedure cannot disguise this and the outcome it had.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: jassi on June 10, 2014, 10:55:13 AM
Then why did Dr Amaral's theory, which is well documented not least by himself, take precedence over all other avenues of investigation? The ins and outs of Portuguese procedure cannot disguise this and the outcome it had.
Did other officers involved in the early investigation put forward alternative, opposing views to Amaral?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Benice on June 10, 2014, 11:11:32 AM
You obviously have no idea what a coordinator does in an investigation in Portugal, do you? There is a hierarchy, of course, but he is not a lead investigator as they exist in the UK. The coordinator normally does not go out on the field (although Gonçalo Amaral sometime did do this) and he does not do the actual investigation. He deals with the reports given to him by the inspectors, decides who goes out and for example which car they use, how much money they take, etc. but he does not decide which direction the investigation takes!!! Itis the evidence that leads the police not one chief inspector. I'm so tired of trying to tell you people how investigations are carried out in countries such as Portugal, Spain, Italy, France and you do not seem to want to understand.
That is certainly not the impression he gives in his book.
So who does decide which direction the investigation takes? And on whose recommendations if that person is not part of the investigation themselves?
For instance - who decided to have the UK police followed?
I think it's nonsense to dispute that he was the Lead investigator. There has to be one in every case making decisions and controlling the direction of the case based on them- otherwise chaos would reign.
Are you saying the other police officers Tavaras, Paivo etc. etc. were not his subordinates and could override him?
Why is he universally described as the man in charge of the case if he wasn't - but was just a glorified Amin. Clerk?
Too daft for words IMO.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: John on June 10, 2014, 11:26:34 AM
I think Montclair is underplaying somewhat the role that Gonçalo Amaral had in this case and indeed the Cipriano case. Amaral went to Praia da Luz and walked the streets making himself familiar with the environs and the people with the sole intention of formulating a theory. He was actively involved in all the decision making and the events which led up to Robert Murat and then the McCanns being designated arguidos. He goes into great detail about this in his book so if these claims are false then he lied.
I will also add that it is untrue to state that Amaral had from the outset decided that the McCanns did it and effectively failed to keep other options open. We know this because Robert Murat became the prime suspect and that was ten days after Madeleine disappeared. Thus by the 13 May the McCanns might have been suspected as having some involvement but were by no means the main suspects. Our Russian friend also came under suspicion because of his links with Murat and the Ocean Club Garden premises.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: John on June 10, 2014, 12:13:58 PM
It must always be remembered that Robert Murat didn't have his arguido status removed even after the formal questioning of the McCanns. It is also well worth considering why the McCanns became suspects and later why the arguido status was removed.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Carana on June 10, 2014, 12:47:55 PM
It must always be remembered that Robert Murat didn't have his arguido status removed even after the formal questioning of the McCanns. It is also well worth considering why the McCanns became suspects and later why the arguido status was removed.
How could that status have been lifted prior to the formal ruling?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: John on June 10, 2014, 03:32:02 PM
Amaral didnt understand what evidence was ...as the archiving statement confirms..
Can you find a part of the archiving report which clearly states the investigation was completed fully before deciding there was no evidence against he parents.
You know something opposite to what the archiving report actually says:
In this sense, the legal procedures were followed, according to the norms and conventions that are in force, and the appearance of the witnesses was requested, inviting them to be present inclusively appealing to solidarity with the McCann couple, as it is certain that since the beginning they adhered to that process diligence.
Nevertheless, despite national authorities assuming all measures to render their trip to Portugal viable, for unknown motives, after the many doubts that they raised about the necessity and opportunity of their trip were clarified several times, they chose not to attend, which rendered the diligence inviable.
We believe that the main damage was caused to the McCann arguidos, who lost the possibility to prove what they have protested since they were constituted arguidos: their innocence towards the fateful event; the investigation was also disturbed, because said facts remain unclarified.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Mr Gray on June 10, 2014, 07:04:33 PM
Can you find a part of the archiving report which clearly states the investigation was completed fully before deciding there was no evidence against he parents.
You know something opposite to what the archiving report actually says:
In this sense, the legal procedures were followed, according to the norms and conventions that are in force, and the appearance of the witnesses was requested, inviting them to be present inclusively appealing to solidarity with the McCann couple, as it is certain that since the beginning they adhered to that process diligence.
Nevertheless, despite national authorities assuming all measures to render their trip to Portugal viable, for unknown motives, after the many doubts that they raised about the necessity and opportunity of their trip were clarified several times, they chose not to attend, which rendered the diligence inviable.
We believe that the main damage was caused to the McCann arguidos, who lost the possibility to prove what they have protested since they were constituted arguidos: their innocence towards the fateful event; the investigation was also disturbed, because said facts remain unclarified.
As I have pointed out several times the archiving report dose not say "proved"...more like "confirm".......
secondly you have only quoted a small part of the report...it says that the evidence that was used to make the mccanns arguidos was basically bo**OX...read it again
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Albertini on June 10, 2014, 10:00:26 PM
As I have pointed out several times the archiving report dose not say "proved"...more like "confirm".......
secondly you have only quoted a small part of the report...it says that the evidence that was used to make the mccanns arguidos was basically bo**OX...read it again
I don't need it read it again thanks, as I understand what it means. What I need to do is pull you up on this repetition of yours that the archiving report found no evidence of a crime committed by the McCann's. In continuing to repeat this mantra you cherry pick what little of the report you do understand to suit your agenda and you epically fail to comprehend the parts that don't fit in with your pro McCann beliefs. Furthermore you deliberately choose to omit the following:
1) the investigation was stopped in its tracks by the McCann's and their friends by their failure to take part in the reconstitution. The investigation therefore was incomplete. It was not finished because the parents of the missing child chose, along with their friends, to refuse to take part and perform a key investigative diligence which would either validate their sworn witness accounts or potentially expose them as liars but either way allow the investigation to continue. So it is actually correct when quoting the archiving report to state that in the opinion of the civil servant who wrote it there was no evidence found against them in a disturbed investigation, and the Arguidos and their friends were directly responsible for the investigation being shelved. Which should actually be raising a red flag about the arguido's and why they would choose to take steps to ensure the end of the only official police investigation looking for their missing child.
2) the archiving report was written by a civil servant and was described by a real judge as an interpretation of the facts, NOT judicial finding. Said judge also described amaral's and the Pj's theory as an equally valid interpretation of the self same facts.
3) Therefore in the Court's eyes the archiving report was simply a different opinion to the Pj's theory and carried no judicial authority.
4) As you already know the self same archiving report states the McCann's failed to demonstrate their innocence. Now based on previous discussions on this matter you clearly do not understand what this means, however it is in there and was written by the same prosecutor, who is a lawyer.
5) whilst you fail to understand what demonstrate their innocence, in the context of the report and investigation, actually means, for those of us who do we recognise that you cannot be "cleared" if you have failed to demonstrate your innocence.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: ferryman on June 10, 2014, 10:17:29 PM
I don't need it read it again thanks, as I understand what it means. What I need to do is pull you up on this repetition of yours that the archiving report found no evidence of a crime committed by the McCann's. In continuing to repeat this mantra you cherry pick what little of the report you do understand to suit your agenda and you epically fail to comprehend the parts that don't fit in with your pro McCann beliefs. Furthermore you deliberately choose to omit the following:
1) the investigation was stopped in its tracks by the McCann's and their friends by their failure to take part in the reconstitution. The investigation therefore was incomplete. It was not finished because the parents of the missing child chose, along with their friends, to refuse to take part and perform a key investigative diligence which would either validate their sworn witness accounts or potentially expose them as liars but either way allow the investigation to continue. So it is actually correct when quoting the archiving report to state that in the opinion of the civil servant who wrote it there was no evidence found against them in a disturbed investigation, and the Arguidos and their friends were directly responsible for the investigation being shelved. Which should actually be raising a red flag about the arguido's and why they would choose to take steps to ensure the end of the only official police investigation looking for their missing child.
2) the archiving report was written by a civil servant and was described by a real judge as an interpretation of the facts, NOT judicial finding. Said judge also described amaral's and the Pj's theory as an equally valid interpretation of the self same facts.
3) Therefore in the Court's eyes the archiving report was simply a different opinion to the Pj's theory and carried no judicial authority.
4) As you already know the self same archiving report states the McCann's failed to demonstrate their innocence. Now based on previous discussions on this matter you clearly do not understand what this means, however it is in there and was written by the same prosecutor, who is a lawyer.
5) whilst you fail to understand what demonstrate their innocence, in the context of the report and investigation, actually means, for those of us who do we recognise that you cannot be "cleared" if you have failed to demonstrate your innocence.
Back to the tired, old, discredited mantra of the "reconstitution".
One day, someone in Portugal will have the simple common sense to sideline such pointless and counterproductive practices to the annals of the history books and bygone law reports, where they truly belong.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Albertini on June 10, 2014, 10:20:44 PM
Back to the tired, old, discredited mantra of the "reconstitution".
One day, someone in Portugal will have the simple common sense to sideline such pointless and counterproductive practices to the annals of the history books and bygone law reports, where they truly belong.
Haha!! The investigative and judicial Titan that is ferryman has spoken!
Cripes!
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: lane99 on June 10, 2014, 10:24:20 PM
Not. Or should I say, knot.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Albertini on June 10, 2014, 10:27:48 PM
It takes a special kind of egotism and arrogance for some random internet poster to casually dismiss a whole country's legal and judicial system which has been built up over many centuries.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: ferryman on June 10, 2014, 10:30:31 PM
It takes a special kind of egotism and arrogance for some random internet poster to casually dismiss a whole country's legal and judicial system which has been built up over many centuries.
The prosecutors in the Madeleine investigation were 80% sound.
The other 20%, well ...
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Albertini on June 10, 2014, 10:55:08 PM
And how many other police authorities who are looking for missing children search cars at their, often vast, borders as a priority ?
If your answer is as before how can you possibly claim the PJ were somehow derelict in their duty by not searching borders if you have no idea what the actual protocol is when a child goes missing ?
In a country sharing a border with another country which is a short drive away, a phone call to alert border patrols that a child was missing should have been done as a matter of course.
Similarly, thought could have been given to alerting the Port Authorities to a missing child.
Unfortunately there was no-one in the PJ team dealing with Madeleine’s abduction who had training in child protection protocols and it really showed as they broke every rule in the book and criticised those who implemented what should have been done.
The Drs McCann have campaigned for Europe wide systems to be introduced as they are all too well aware of the deficiencies which affected madeleine’s case. The Amber Alert system will ensure among many other things that all missing children in Europe will be mapped; it will allow for the quick issuing of cross border alerts when a child goes missing near an EU border; it will allow for easy cross language border alerting, through automatic translation of the missing child poster.
In a country sharing a border with another country which is a short drive away, a phone call to alert border patrols that a child was missing should have been done as a matter of course.
Similarly, thought could have been given to alerting the Port Authorities to a missing child.
Unfortunately there was no-one in the PJ team dealing with Madeleine’s abduction who had training in child protection protocols and it really showed as they broke every rule in the book and criticised those who implemented what should have been done.
The Drs McCann have campaigned for Europe wide systems to be introduced as they are all too well aware of the deficiencies which affected madeleine’s case. The Amber Alert system will ensure among many other things that all missing children in Europe will be mapped; it will allow for the quick issuing of cross border alerts when a child goes missing near an EU border; it will allow for easy cross language border alerting, through automatic translation of the missing child poster.
So you will be able to show me in which countries were cars searched at border crossings AS A PRIORITY in 2007 when a child went missing.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: John on June 11, 2014, 04:00:58 AM
* Anyone who thinks for a moment that every border crossing between Portugal and Spain could have been closed and every vehicle checked 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, is really living in cloud cuckoo land. It was simply an impossible task.
* The Portuguese searches in and around Praia da Luz were extensive and involved both military and civilian personnel. It is laughable to compare the efforts by SY over the last few days to those searches in 2007.
* The instructing of outside agents by the Madeleine Fund effectively damaged the official investigation and by extension the search for Madeleine. Potential witnesses spoke of being harassed, intimidated and alienated by private detectives operating illegally inside Portugal. A lawyer even reported that an attempt was made to coerce him into taking part in a scheme to discredit the coordinating detective in the case. All said and done, a really sad state of affairs.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Albertini on June 11, 2014, 05:30:22 AM
WOW ~ I've got it ~ it was the twins wot dunnit, probably phoned madeleine's friends at school to consult if a fridge would be of use for concealment.
8. Why didn’t you ask the twins, at that moment, what had happened to their sister or why didn’t you ask them later on?
32. What was Madeleine’s relationship like with her brother and sister?
33. What was Madeleine’s relationship like with her brother and sister, friends and school mates?
I didn't think your credibility could sink any lower, however you have excelled yourself here.
You do also realise the fridge isn't the only theory don't you? For example a variation of the theory is that the body whilst being transported was put on ice in the car or wrapped in say, a pink blanket, which was wrapped in ice.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Eleanor on June 11, 2014, 07:48:29 AM
MI5? Is this Amaral's New, Improved Thesis? Does he know what MI5 is?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Carana on June 11, 2014, 07:55:17 AM
Surely arguido status can be removed at any time if evidence is obtained which justifies it?
Apparently not, John. If you're made an arguido, your status as such remains for the duration of the case (unless it's shelved).
2000 CPP: Artigo 57.o Qualidade de arguido 1 - Assume a qualidade de arguido todo aquele contra quem for deduzida acusação ou requerida instrução num processo penal. 2 - A qualidade de arguido conserva-se durante todo o decurso do processo. 3 - É correspondentemente aplicável o disposto nos n.os 2, 3 e 4 do artigo seguinte. http://paulosantos-adv.planetaclix.pt/CPP.htm
2000 CPP: Article 57 Status of defendant 1 - Assumes the status of every defendant against whom indictment is required or statement in criminal proceedings. 2 - The status of defendant is conserved throughout the course of the proceedings. 3 - And correspondingly applicable paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 in the following article.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: ferryman on June 11, 2014, 07:58:27 AM
Apparently not, John. If you're made an arguido, your status as such remains for the duration of the case (unless it's shelved).
2000 CPP: Artigo 57.o Qualidade de arguido 1 - Assume a qualidade de arguido todo aquele contra quem for deduzida acusação ou requerida instrução num processo penal. 2 - A qualidade de arguido conserva-se durante todo o decurso do processo. 3 - É correspondentemente aplicável o disposto nos n.os 2, 3 e 4 do artigo seguinte. http://paulosantos-adv.planetaclix.pt/CPP.htm
Yep!
That's what the Portuguese poster Stinky Sardine always said ...
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: stephen25000 on June 11, 2014, 07:58:50 AM
Apparently not, John. If you're made an arguido, your status as such remains for the duration of the case (unless it's shelved).
2000 CPP: Artigo 57.o Qualidade de arguido 1 - Assume a qualidade de arguido todo aquele contra quem for deduzida acusação ou requerida instrução num processo penal. 2 - A qualidade de arguido conserva-se durante todo o decurso do processo. 3 - É correspondentemente aplicável o disposto nos n.os 2, 3 e 4 do artigo seguinte. http://paulosantos-adv.planetaclix.pt/CPP.htm
..........and can of course be reinstated for up to 20 years after the initial event.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: stephen25000 on June 11, 2014, 07:59:56 AM
And how many other police authorities who are looking for missing children search cars at their, often vast, borders as a priority ?
If your answer is as before how can you possibly claim the PJ were somehow derelict in their duty by not searching borders if you have no idea what the actual protocol is when a child goes missing ?
Perhaps you would be so kind as to highlight the post I made in which I claimed the PJ were derelict in their duty by not searching the borders? And once you've done that perhaps you could answer my question regarding the length of time dedicated to the search for April Jones compared to, for example, the search for Madeleine McCann, many thanks.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: ferryman on June 11, 2014, 08:38:40 AM
Where do people get the notion that there was "insufficient" evidence against the McCanns?
There was no evidence against the McCanns ...
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Albertini on June 11, 2014, 09:30:17 AM
Anyone accused knows whether they are innocent or guilty.
The police must have credible reason to believe a person guilty before a trial can take place.
In the Madeleine investigation, the police had none to suppose the McCanns guilty.
But no one else other than themselves knows whether they are innocent or guilty. And police forces the world over need something more than a solemn promise that they weren't involved.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Eleanor on June 11, 2014, 09:32:15 AM
The GNR and rescue services did try to find her in the early days, and the PJ checked out potential sightings (or asked their counterparts elsewhere to do so).
That's not the issue though. Once they had arguidos, the clock was ticking to mount a case against them before the deadline expired.
Amaral got booted because of his diplomatic gaffe in which he was fuming that the UK police were continuing to send in any potential other leads.
Ah, Yes. That pesky old clock was ticking.
And Amaral did say that he was getting no cooperation from The Brit Police in his witch hunt against The McCanns. But why did he need their help? It was his investigation. And anyway, he was ignoring what The Brit Police had to say.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: stephen25000 on June 11, 2014, 09:32:51 AM
But no one else other than themselves knows whether they are innocent or guilty. And police forces the world over need something more than a solemn promise that they weren't involved.
Such as proper detective work, largely (but not exclusively) lacking under Amaral.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Albertini on June 11, 2014, 09:36:21 AM
You do realize don't you , there is no evidence whatsoever linking madeleine's disappearance to a paedophile.
Just your imagination.
I notice your failed to comment on your 'cousins' remark which I quoted. Why is that ?
Sorry. We appear to be on different pages here. I don't necessarily think that Madeleine was taken by paedophiles. But knowing that there was one about could have resulted in an entirely different scenario, bearing in mind that this paedophile was breaking into apartments in the middle of the night.
In so far as my "Cousin's" remark is concerned, I tend not to place too much importance on newspaper quotes. But I do suspect that if The PJ had tried to arrest The McCanns and put them on trial, then their lawyers would have stepped in. Wouldn't yours?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Carana on June 11, 2014, 11:15:00 AM
Irrelevant. Distraction and diversion from what was being discussed.
What was and is being discussed is the fact that Amaral failed to do any boring old police work that might have pointed him in the direction of this window before he wrote his Thesis.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Eleanor on June 11, 2014, 12:28:55 PM
We can always wait and see if anyone gets arrested, and then charged. But it still wouldn't be a good idea to jump to conclusions.
This is the thing. You won't catch me assuming that someone is guilty when I don't have access to evidence.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: John on June 11, 2014, 12:38:08 PM
Members are reminded of our strict ethos when it comes to potentially litigious posts. Please do not to post anything controversial or accusatory unless you have proof or corroboration of some sort to back up such comments. If in doubt please pm myself or an admin. TY
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Alfred R Jones on June 11, 2014, 12:42:50 PM
No problem with that, if the evidence supports that status.
That's good to know. You will of course be among the first to apologise to the McCanns for your long campaign against them if and when it is established they were not responsible for hiding their child's body and staging an abduction...?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: faithlilly on June 11, 2014, 12:57:29 PM
That's good to know. You will of course be among the first to apologise to the McCanns for your long campaign against them if and when it is established they were not responsible for hiding their child's body and staging an abduction...?
Absolutely.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Carana on June 11, 2014, 12:59:49 PM
Members are reminded of our strict ethos when it comes to potentially litigious posts. Please do not to post anything controversial or accusatory unless you have proof or corroboration of some sort to back up such comments. If in doubt please pm myself or an admin. TY
Perhaps you could reinforce the concept of providing links to credible sources?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: faithlilly on June 11, 2014, 01:02:15 PM
Seriously ? Didn't you just accuse Amaral of having a hand in Madeleine's disappearance a few pages back ?
Wrong context, and you know it. I suggested he might have found the window for abduction if he had done some boring old police work. He obviously didn't.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: faithlilly on June 11, 2014, 01:13:02 PM
Wrong context, and you know it. I suggested he might have found the window for abduction if he had done some boring old police work. He obviously didn't.
Really ? And I quote :
"The McCanns are not responsible for whatever might have happened to Madeleine. But Amaral could well be. But there is still no evidence that Madeleine is dead."
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Eleanor on June 11, 2014, 01:20:09 PM
"The McCanns are not responsible for whatever might have happened to Madeleine. But Amaral could well be. But there is still no evidence that Madeleine is dead."
If Amaral had done his job properly from the beginning Madeleine could have been found yonks ago. Or are you telling me he didn't know about the paedophile and the burglars?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: faithlilly on June 11, 2014, 01:23:27 PM
If Amaral had done his job properly from the beginning Madeleine could have been found yonks ago. Or are you telling me he didn't know about the paedophile and the burglars?
But we have absolutely no evidence that paedophiles or burglars are involved...........unless you're assuming their guilt without evidence. 8(0(*
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Eleanor on June 11, 2014, 01:28:55 PM
We have absolutely no evidence that The McCanns were involved, unless you are assuming their guilt without evidence.
As far as I am aware, no person of interest Scotland Yard wants to interview has been named.
Is that right?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Brietta on June 11, 2014, 02:01:57 PM
Prompted by the new GNR dog thread to do a little reading regarding the searches which took place in Praia Da Luz in the aftermath of Madeleine’s disappearance, my belief that Dr Amaral’s theory was wrong has been totally reinforced.
If the reports in the files detailing the searches which took place are accurate, there is absolutely no way that Madeleine’s body could have been temporarily concealed for removal at a later date.
The detail contained in this part of the files rules the parents out and indeed would rule out that a child's body was concealed anywhere near the holiday apartment at that time. http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GNR_SNIFFER.htm
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: jassi on June 11, 2014, 02:09:15 PM
So you would conclude that SY are wasting their time using their dogs to assist in their digging?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: faithlilly on June 11, 2014, 02:12:14 PM
Prompted by the new GNR dog thread to do a little reading regarding the searches which took place in Praia Da Luz in the aftermath of Madeleine’s disappearance, my belief that Dr Amaral’s theory was wrong has been totally reinforced.
If the reports in the files detailing the searches which took place are accurate, there is absolutely no way that Madeleine’s body could have been temporarily concealed for removal at a later date.
The detail contained in this part of the files rules the parents out and indeed would rule out that a child's body was concealed anywhere near the holiday apartment at that time. http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GNR_SNIFFER.htm
Weren't the sniffer dogs brought in to follow the scent of a live child ?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Brietta on June 11, 2014, 02:25:47 PM
Weren't the sniffer dogs brought in to follow the scent of a live child ?
There is a new thread for discussion on the GNR dogs ... this one is about Dr Amaral's theory.
My reference is to the number and nature of the searches undertaken and the areas searched.
imo the GNR pulled out all the stops in the search for what they thought was a wandering child, I doubt if they would have ignored the finding of a child's body because of that.
If the searches are as thorough as reported in the files, and I have no reason to think they are not a correct record of events ... there is no doubt in my mind that they contribute nothing to support Dr Amaral's theory ... and I have no doubt that Dr Amaral's theory is wrong.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: faithlilly on June 11, 2014, 02:32:14 PM
There is a new thread for discussion on the GNR dogs ... this one is about Dr Amaral's theory.
My reference is to the number and nature of the searches undertaken and the areas searched.
imo the GNR pulled out all the stops in the search for what they thought was a wandering child, I doubt if they would have ignored the finding of a child's body because of that.
If the searches are as thorough as reported in the files, and I have no reason to think they are not a correct record of events ... there is no doubt in my mind that they contribute nothing to support Dr Amaral's theory ... and I have no doubt that Dr Amaral's theory is wrong.
Amaral's thesis is certainly unproven but as to it being wrong, only time will tell us that.
ETA If the dogs are trained to track a live child would they alert to a dead, concealed one ?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Brietta on June 11, 2014, 02:32:36 PM
So you would conclude that SY are wasting their time using their dogs to assist in their digging?
I'm presuming your query is addressed to me.
No ... I do not make that conclusion
a: I do not know what information NSY are working to b: I said I do not believe Madeleine's body was hidden in the areas searched by the Portuguese police in May 2007 c: I do not think Dr Amaral's theory is feasible
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Brietta on June 11, 2014, 02:37:28 PM
Amaral's thesis is certainly unproven but as to it being wrong, only time will tell us that.
If Dr Amarals thesis had any basis, he would have been able to ensure that the Drs McCann would face the full rigours of the law based on his inquiries.
There was no evidence to enable him to do that ... therefore his theory was wrong because there is no evidence to support it.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: jassi on June 11, 2014, 02:43:06 PM
His enquiries were cut short, of course, otherwise who knows where they might have led.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: faithlilly on June 11, 2014, 02:45:29 PM
If Dr Amarals thesis had any basis, he would have been able to ensure that the Drs McCann would face the full rigours of the law based on his inquiries.
There was no evidence to enable him to do that ... therefore his theory was wrong because there is no evidence to support it.
Amaral was taken off of the case. Who knows what would have happened if he had been allowed to bring the Smiths back to PDL, the reconstruction had taken place etc, etc, etc.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Brietta on June 11, 2014, 03:01:29 PM
Amaral was taken off of the case. Who knows what would have happened if he had been allowed to bring the Smiths back to PDL, the reconstruction had taken place etc, etc, etc.
Pity he didn't take the opportunity to have a reconstruction when the majority of the players were still in PDL, might even have managed to catch a few holidaymakers who were eye witnesses. Then he would have to have had the airport closed to do that???
What could Mr Smith add to anything? He was aware that his identification of Dr Gerry McCann was mistaken ... exactly as the McClusky identification of the same event was mistaken.
Unless Dr Amaral was prepared to formulate a new theory based on the information available to him he would have been unable to progress the case any further than he did.
As far as we are led to believe the current investigation is taking place because the PJ and the Met used information available to Dr Amaral in 2007 ~ but ignored by him because he had become convinced of Madeleine's parents' guilt.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 11, 2014, 03:04:19 PM
Pity he didn't take the opportunity to have a reconstruction when the majority of the players were still in PDL, might even have managed to catch a few holidaymakers who were eye witnesses. Then he would have to have had the airport closed to do that???
What could Mr Smith add to anything? He was aware that his identification of Dr Gerry McCann was mistaken ... exactly as the McClusky identification of the same event was mistaken.
Unless Dr Amaral was prepared to formulate a new theory based on the information available to him he would have been unable to progress the case any further than he did.
As far as we are led to believe the current investigation is taking place because the PJ and the Met used information available to Dr Amaral in 2007 ~ but ignored by him because he had become convinced of Madeleine's parents' guilt.
He wasn't wrong.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 11, 2014, 03:17:01 PM
On what basis do you claim that the Portuguese investigators were experts...as I understand amaral had almost no experience of a crime of this kind...unless you count the cipriano case where amaral received a criminal conviction for his role in the case...hardly the mark of an expert....as I understand the team were woefully inexperienced
What crime?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Albertini on June 11, 2014, 04:15:30 PM
your claim that the PJ are experts shows how little you understand the real facts in this case. Had they really been experts carried out a proper investigation we would not be here now. They have been described as incompetent and their investigation "bungled" for good raeson
Who in authority has described it as incompetent and bungled other than the McCann's mouthpiece?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Mr Gray on June 11, 2014, 07:31:51 PM
Who in authority has described it as incompetent and bungled other than the McCann's mouthpiece?
on whos authority is amaral et al an expert on this type of case....whats his track record...oh yes...amaral was sacked
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Eleanor on June 12, 2014, 08:19:10 AM
According to some it was Amaral's job to sit in the office and to shuffle statements and other paper work, and not his job to decide which way the investigation should go. Hence it was nothing to do with him if the Officers supposedly under him went off and did their own thing thereby all arriving at the conclusion that The McCanns done it. So is his thesis just their opinion, or is it his?
Sadly, from what I have seen, he didn't do a lot of coordinating.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: stephen25000 on June 12, 2014, 08:42:11 AM
According to some it was Amaral's job to sit in the office and to shuffle statements and other paper work, and not his job to decide which way the investigation should go. Hence it was nothing to do with him if the Officers supposedly under him went off and did their own thing thereby all arriving at the conclusion that The McCanns done it. So is his thesis just their opinion, or is it his?
Sadly, from what I have seen, he didn't do a lot of coordinating.
I find it quite fascinating the lengths some people go to to attack Amaral. Nothing he has said or stated hasn't been echoed by other people, repeatedly, yet he seems to be the paramount focus of certain. It would make an interesting psychological study into why he has become the focus of some peoples hatred.
Meanwhile, how would you know Eleanor what Amaral was doing. Were you there ?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Eleanor on June 12, 2014, 08:51:38 AM
I find it quite fascinating the lengths some people go to to attack Amaral. Nothing he has said or stated hasn't been echoed by other people, repeatedly, yet he seems to be the paramount focus of certain. It would make an interesting psychological study into why he has become the focus of some peoples hatred.
Meanwhile, how would you know Eleanor what Amaral was doing. Were you there ?
Don't be silly, I don't hate him. I actually feel rather sorry for him. But one cannot ignore the facts. He is a convicted criminal and fraudster, and he was sacked from the case, leaving a total mess behind which others had to try and make sense of. Of course "His" Thesis can't be credible.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: stephen25000 on June 12, 2014, 08:56:19 AM
Don't be silly, I don't hate him. I actually feel rather sorry for him. But one cannot ignore the facts. He is a convicted criminal and fraudster, and he was sacked from the case, leaving a total mess behind which others had to try and make sense of. Of course "His" Thesis can't be credible.
He was sacked because he objected to interference in the case by UK police.
His 'thesis' as you call it has not been disproved.
It still remains 'type of crime unknown'.
Meanwhile nothing has been found by SY, has it ?
....and as we know the mccanns failed to fully cooperate in the investigation.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Eleanor on June 12, 2014, 09:06:57 AM
He was sacked because he objected to interference in the case by UK police.
His 'thesis' as you call it has not been disproved.
It still remains 'type of crime unknown'.
Meanwhile nothing has been found by SY, has it ?
....and as we know the mccanns failed to fully cooperate in the investigation.
Oh, I thought he wanted help from The UK Police. Did he get upset because they didn't agree with him? He certainly upset someone, but I thought it was The Hierarchy of The PJ that objected.
I agree, Type of Crime, Unknown.
SY are working on it with the cooperation of The PJ.
The McCanns did not fail to cooperate with the investigation. They were never required in law to do or say anything that might have implicated them.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: jassi on June 12, 2014, 09:11:15 AM
Oh, I thought he wanted help from The UK Police. Did he get upset because they didn't agree with him? He certainly upset someone, but I thought it was The Hierarchy of The PJ that objected.
I agree, Type of Crime, Unknown.
SY are working on it with the cooperation of The PJ.
The McCanns did not fail to cooperate with the investigation. They were never required in law to do or say anything that might have implicated them.
As perfect innocents, how could they have said anything to implicate themselves, or each other ?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: stephen25000 on June 12, 2014, 09:12:45 AM
Oh, I thought he wanted help from The UK Police. Did he get upset because they didn't agree with him? He certainly upset someone, but I thought it was The Hierarchy of The PJ that objected.
I agree, Type of Crime, Unknown.
SY are working on it with the cooperation of The PJ.
The McCanns did not fail to cooperate with the investigation. They were never required in law to do or say anything that might have implicated them.
They did fail to fully cooperate with the in investigation.
That is a recorded fact..
If they really believed Madeleine could be found they could have fully cooperated.
The non-cooperation was already in evidence before arguido status was invoked.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: stephen25000 on June 12, 2014, 11:19:03 AM
If it hadn't been for the mccanns you would never have heard of amaral or even attacked him.
This case revolves around the mccanns and ALWAYS WILL.
So get over it.
Amaral might wish he had never heard of The McCanns Or written his disgusting book. Or gone on television accusing The McCanns of complicity. He has no one one but himself to blame for being exposed as a liar and a thief, which he is.
But at least The PJ might be a bit more careful about who they beat up. Portuguese Citizens simply will not tolerate it anymore.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Carana on June 12, 2014, 06:59:36 PM
If Amaral had done his job properly from the beginning Madeleine could have been found yonks ago. Or are you telling me he didn't know about the paedophile and the burglars?
God, some people are so obtuse and ignore any information which goes against their prejudices. You and some others keep blaming Gonçalo Amaral for something over which he had no power nor authority. He did not lead the investigation and did not steer it towards the hypothesis that Madeleine had died, that person was a Brit who was recommended by the Leicestershire police.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Eleanor on June 12, 2014, 09:23:01 PM
God, some people are so obtuse and ignore any information which goes against their prejudices. You and some others keep blaming Gonçalo Amaral for something over which he had no power nor authority. He did not lead the investigation and did not steer it towards the hypothesis that Madeleine had died, that person was a Brit who was recommended by the Leicestershire police.
So Amaral did not lead the investigation? ORLY.
Actually, on reflection, I might be inclined to agree with you as Amaral doesn't seem to have been of much use at all. He certainly didn't do any detecting.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Montclair on June 12, 2014, 09:27:32 PM
Actually, on reflection, I might be inclined to agree with you as Amaral doesn't seem to have been of much use at all. He certainly didn't do any detecting.
FGS, you still haven't realised that Gonçalo Amaral did not lead the investigation? It's not an opinion, it is a fact. Coordinators don't do detective work.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Eleanor on June 12, 2014, 09:33:42 PM
FGS, you still haven't realised that Gonçalo Amaral did not lead the investigation? It's not an opinion, it is a fact. Coordinators don't do detective work.
So in his book he just repeated what everyone else told him. He doesn't actually hold these opinions himself. In fact it was a lie that he suspected The McCanns on the very first morning after Madeleine disappeared?
So why is he being sued for Libel and Defamation when it is obviously someone else's fault?
Oh, And why did he get paid for doing it?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Montclair on June 12, 2014, 09:39:08 PM
So in his book he just repeated what everyone else told him. He doesn't actually hold these opinions himself. In fact it was a lie that he suspected The McCanns on the very first morning after Madeleine disappeared?
So why is he being sued for Libel and Defamation when it is obviously someone else's fault?
Oh, And why did he get paid for doing it?
He is being sued because he wrote a book, a book, you know. BTW, he didn't suspect them the very first morning as lot of people didn't.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Eleanor on June 12, 2014, 09:44:08 PM
He is being sued because he wrote a book, a book, you know. BTW, he didn't suspect them the very first morning as lot of people didn't.
He said in his book that he did. Although God knows where he got that idea from since he didn't know what the hell was going on at that point. Or later, for that matter.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Benice on June 12, 2014, 09:47:50 PM
FGS, you still haven't realised that Gonçalo Amaral did not lead the investigation? It's not an opinion, it is a fact. Coordinators don't do detective work.
So what does he mean when he says this in his book:-
In Portinmao, I meet chief inspector Tavares de Almeida, a member of the team I directed. End quote
Surely his 'team' consisted of the police officers who were investigating the case. It seems clear enough that they were all his subordinates and their investigations into the case were being directed by him.
His book doesn't give the slightest hint to his readers that he didn't do any of the detective work in this case. In fact quite the opposite impression is given.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: ferryman on June 12, 2014, 09:56:16 PM
Penultimate sentence and paragraph of Harrison's third and final report:
I am currently of the opinion on the available information and statistical datasets that if death has occurred, that it is possible that Madeleine McCann’s body has been disposed into the sea at Praia da Luz. (See my second report entitled “NPIA OP TASK Search Doc Beach and Marine”).
[edited]
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: ferryman on June 12, 2014, 10:05:49 PM
After a week of intense work, Harrison presents the results of his study to my coordinating group. Even if we were expecting it, his conclusions confirm our worst fears. The most plausible scenario is the following: there is no doubt that Madeleine is dead, and her body is hidden somewhere in the area around Praia da Luz. He praises the quality of the work carried out by the Portuguese authorities in trying to find the little girl alive. According to him, the time has come to redirect the searches in order to find, this time, a body hidden in the surrounding area.
Goncalo Amaral ...
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Brietta on June 12, 2014, 10:45:54 PM
It is an absolute misrepresentation of a professional’s opinion and designed to bolster his theory and sell his book.
Since his theory is that Madeleine’s parents had covered up her death it is also a calumny directed at them.
I am afraid it is the measure of the man.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: pegasus on June 13, 2014, 09:44:41 PM
Although unusual, a body is not a pre requisite to securing a murder conviction in the courts.
The fact that Dr Amaral's theory could not be substantiated by enough evidence to lay charges is proof that his theory was fatally flawed.
No. It just means that they did not have enough evidence. Many cold cases prove your claim wrong. For instance a case of Maria Ridulph, kidnapped from her home in 1957, her decomposing remaind found the next yoear. The police had their suspect pintpinted from the get go. Unfortunately the dude, provided the alibi that was backed up by the witnesses. There was not enough evidence to bring the case to court, it got shelved for years. It was reopened in 2011, the new evidence was found after the exhumation of Maria's body and the new witnesses stepped in, including a woman, who was Tessier's girlfriend in 1957. She helped to demolish his alibi. And voila, the man who was the suspect number one from the very beginning got sentenced for this murder. So it seems the police theory was not flawed in spite of the lacking evidence.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Alfred R Jones on June 15, 2014, 06:54:29 PM
No. It just means that they did not have enough evidence. Many cold cases prove your claim wrong. For instance a case of Maria Ridulph, kidnapped from her home in 1957, her decomposing remaind found the next yoear. The police had their suspect pintpinted from the get go. Unfortunately the dude, provided the alibi that was backed up by the witnesses. There was not enough evidence to bring the case to court, it got shelved for years. It was reopened in 2011, the new evidence was found after the exhumation of Maria's body and the new witnesses stepped in, including a woman, who was Tessier's girlfriend in 1957. She helped to demolish his alibi. And voila, the man who was the suspect number one from the very beginning got sentenced for this murder. So it seems the police theory was not flawed in spite of the lacking evidence.
Hmm. Interesting case, there is some serious doubt about the safety of the conviction - in fact as with the Madeleine McCann case there were no clues left when the abductor struck.
Also interestingly there was no agreement regarding the timeline - does this sound familiar and does it confer suspicion on those with the conflicting stories?
"Already, there were conflicting reports about the exact time of Maria's disappearance. Was she snatched closer to 6 p.m.? Or did it happen later, at about 7? Police and FBI reports, as well as news accounts from the time, contain details that support both scenarios.
Sycamore's police chief, William Hindenburg, told FBI agents that Kathy and Maria went out to play at 6:02 p.m., but the DeKalb County sheriff said Maria didn't call Kathy and ask her to come out and play until 6:30. Maria's mother later altered her original estimate, saying the girls could have been outside as early as 10 minutes to 6".
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Albertini on June 15, 2014, 07:50:17 PM
Although unusual, a body is not a pre requisite to securing a murder conviction in the courts.
The fact that Dr Amaral's theory could not be substantiated by enough evidence to lay charges is proof that his theory was fatally flawed.
The fact that what could be called a cold case review in Britain by the Met and a cold case review in Portugal by the PJ revealed sufficient evidence for Madeleine's case to be reopened proves how wrong Dr Amaral's theory was and is.
On the evidence, most of which was available to the original investigation led by Dr Amaral, both the PJ and the Met are following lines of inquiry the original investigation ignored
How is it proof when the investigation was INCOMPLETE at the point of it being shelved?
What adds weight to the thesis of parental involvement is the fact the parents and their friends were the ones whose actions were the reason the investigation was incomplete when it was shelved.
It can credibly suggested that one theory is that the PJ were getting too close for comfort.
Now you and your fellow supporters will not agree with that but whether you like it or not that is a valid conclusion to draw from their actions in refusing to provide the PJ with information given they were the last people to see the child alive and well.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Mr Gray on June 15, 2014, 07:51:45 PM
How is it proof when the investigation was INCOMPLETE at the point of it being shelved?
What adds weight to the thesis of parental involvement is the fact the parents and their friends were the ones whose actions were the reason the investigation was incomplete when it was shelved.
It can credibly suggested that one henry is that the PJ were getting too close for comfort.
Now you and your fellow supporters will not agree with that but whether you like it or not that is a valid conclusion to draw from their actions in refusing to provide the PJ with information given they were the last people to see the child alive and well.
no its not a valid conclusion
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Albertini on June 15, 2014, 07:54:32 PM
I don't have to tell myself anything. Kate and Gerry will be in Court tomorrow giving impact statements.
Unless.......wait for it........Gonc comes up with another excuse. I am not entirely discarding that possibility.
will they be backing up what their other witnesses said?
You know that the Arguido status didn't really bother them at all as reported by Susan Hubbard Alan pike and Michael wright which is completely contradicted by the pairs previous on record statements?
I wish them good luck in trying to square that circle.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Victoria on June 16, 2014, 10:40:20 AM
Amaral's 'thesis' now appears to include the child's body being stuffed between the feet of a dead woman who was cremated a month after the disappearance. The bloke really has totally lost it. @)(++(*
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: stephen25000 on June 16, 2014, 10:46:19 AM
Amaral's 'thesis' now appears to include the child's body being stuffed between the feet of a dead woman who was cremated a month after the disappearance. The bloke really has totally lost it. @)(++(*
Where did you see this ?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Eleanor on June 16, 2014, 10:56:26 AM
Amaral's 'thesis' now appears to include the child's body being stuffed between the feet of a dead woman who was cremated a month after the disappearance. The bloke really has totally lost it. @)(++(*
Seen this. It has to be a joke, surely? Otherwise Amaral really has gone barking.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: stephen25000 on June 16, 2014, 11:11:15 AM
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: carlymichelle on June 16, 2014, 11:34:00 AM
oh dear i just read that the mcanns cant go ahead with the court because maddie is a ward of the court and they dont have documents?? trial delayed until july
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Eleanor on June 16, 2014, 11:37:43 AM
oh dear i just read that the mcanns cant go ahead with the court because maddie is a ward of the court and they dont have documents?? @)(++(* trial delayed for 10 days
The McCanns don't need The Documents for another thirty days. And The Judge has already said that The Trial would continue anyway. At least until Gonc did a runner this morning.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: carlymichelle on June 16, 2014, 11:41:13 AM
Sky News have just reported that Kate McCann is sitting in the hallway looking distressed
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: stephen25000 on June 16, 2014, 11:57:27 AM
oh dear i just read that the mcanns cant go ahead with the court because maddie is a ward of the court and they dont have documents?? @)(++(* trial delayed for 10 days
I really don't see what's so funny.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: jassi on June 16, 2014, 11:59:43 AM
The McCanns don't need The Documents for another thirty days. And The Judge has already said that The Trial would continue anyway. At least until Gonc did a runner this morning.
Perhaps a strategic withdrawal would be more accurate ?{)(**
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Mr Gray on June 16, 2014, 12:03:22 PM
bb1 Today at 11:41 am
.
Gary O'Shea @sunnewsreporter · 33s Goncalo Amaral has succeeded in sabotaging the McCanns' big day in court. Case adjourned. Judge wants him to hire a new lawyer within 10days
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: carlymichelle on June 16, 2014, 12:04:03 PM
kate is talking about maddies human rights too bad they didnt think of her human rights
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Mr Gray on June 16, 2014, 12:07:01 PM
the thread should be renamed...amaral...credible or not...he has no credibilitY
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: stephen25000 on June 16, 2014, 12:32:23 PM
He gave them a taste of their own medicine. 8)-)))
Yes, what a terribly clever fellow.
There is a problem of course. He is fast running out of options. The judge has given him just 10 days to appoint another lawyer of his own choosing. Otherwise the court will appoint one for him.
If he fails to appear again, he risks a "judgement in default of defense" which is binding.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Alfred R Jones on June 16, 2014, 03:11:06 PM
Amarals Thesis - credible or not, is the title of this thread.
I contend it is not. After all, even the author is so confident in the veracity of his own thesis that he bottled his "day in court" this morning.
Q.E.D.
8)--))
Remember the days, not that long ago, when we were assured the McCanns had settled on Amaral's terms? OMG what a joke. Before that we were assured Amaral was itching to get the McCanns into the witness stand where he would then flourish the much vaunted ace he had up his sleeve and trounce them with his brilliance. Another hilarious joke. The man is a coward and a joke and any credibility he may have started off with at the beginning of this farce (and it wasn't much then) now lies in tatters at his feet.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: faithlilly on June 16, 2014, 03:31:23 PM
Remember the days, not that long ago, when we were assured the McCanns had settled on Amaral's terms? OMG what a joke. Before that we were assured Amaral was itching to get the McCanns into the witness stand where he would then flourish the much vaunted ace he had up his sleeve and trounce them with his brilliance. Another hilarious joke. The man is a coward and a joke and any credibility he may have started off with at the beginning of this farce (and it wasn't much then) now lies in tatters at his feet.
Soon after it was rumoured that the McCanns were seeking a settlement with Amaral with regard to their libel claim their Facebook webmaster was asked whether those rumours were true. The webmaster informed the questioner that she would ask Kate and get back to them, which she did within a few days, reporting that the rumours where simply that, rumours.
When this information was passed to a well respected blogger, who subsequently published it on his blog, legal action was threatened unless Kate's answer, via her webmaster, was withdrawn from his blog.
Now my question is this. If the McCanns hadn't asked to settle, and where indeed telling the truth that it was only a rumour, why the need to threaten legal action to have Kate's answer withdrawn from the public domain ?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Carana on June 16, 2014, 05:05:26 PM
There is a problem of course. He is fast running out of options. The judge has given him just 10 days to appoint another lawyer of his own choosing. Otherwise the court will appoint one for him.
If he fails to appear again, he risks a "judgement in default of defense" which is binding.
I asked you on a different thread, but there have been musical threads again, so you may have missed it.
It seems as if he's stalling... but to what end?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Jean-Pierre on June 16, 2014, 05:12:35 PM
Soon after it was rumoured that the McCanns were seeking a settlement with Amaral with regard to their libel claim their Facebook webmaster was asked whether those rumours were true. The webmaster informed the questioner that she would ask Kate and get back to them, which she did within a few days, reporting that the rumours where simply that, rumours.
When this information was passed to a well respected blogger, who subsequently published it on his blog, legal action was threatened unless Kate's answer, via her webmaster, was withdrawn from his blog.
Now my question is this. If the McCanns hadn't asked to settle, and where indeed telling the truth that it was only a rumour, why the need to threaten legal action to have Kate's answer withdrawn from the public domain ?
If you still seriously believe that the attempt to settle was an attempt to sue for peace by the McCanns after todays events then I fear you must have a more tenuous grasp on reality than even I had thought.
It is duty of all litigants to attempt find a settlement out of court.
The only ones who can actually stay an action are the plaintiffs, or the judge may order the parties to some form of mediation. The defendant never has that right, for obvious reasons.
so the McCanns would have had to stay the action, but it was clearly initiated by "Dr" Amaral, trying an offer which was unacceptable.
Never mind. I am sure he will be grateful for any donations, and may even raise a glass to he gullible donees.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: jassi on June 16, 2014, 05:15:18 PM
If you still seriously believe that the attempt to settle was an attempt to sue for peace by the McCanns after todays events then I fear you must have a more tenuous grasp on reality than even I had thought.
It is duty of all litigants to attempt find a settlement out of court.
The only ones who can actually stay an action are the plaintiffs, or the judge may order the parties to some form of mediation. The defendant never has that right, for obvious reasons.
so the McCanns would have had to stay the action, but it was clearly initiated by "Dr" Amaral, trying an offer which was unacceptable. Never mind. I am sure he will be grateful for any donations, and may even raise a glass to he gullible donees.
He could perhaps recoup his finances with a a new book - 'The McCanns, holidaymakers from Hell' @)(++(*
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Eleanor on June 16, 2014, 05:20:04 PM
If you still seriously believe that the attempt to settle was an attempt to sue for peace by the McCanns after todays events then I fear you must have a more tenuous grasp on reality than even I had thought.
It is duty of all litigants to attempt find a settlement out of court.
The only ones who can actually stay an action are the plaintiffs, or the judge may order the parties to some form of mediation. The defendant never has that right, for obvious reasons.
so the McCanns would have had to stay the action, but it was clearly initiated by "Dr" Amaral, trying an offer which was unacceptable.
Never mind. I am sure he will be grateful for any donations, and may even raise a glass to he gullible donees.
It is not at all clear that it was 'initiated by Dr Amaral' but if it was why the need to threaten several individuals with legal action over a statement that was, basically, the truth ?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Alfred R Jones on June 16, 2014, 05:43:10 PM
Soon after it was rumoured that the McCanns were seeking a settlement with Amaral with regard to their libel claim their Facebook webmaster was asked whether those rumours were true. The webmaster informed the questioner that she would ask Kate and get back to them, which she did within a few days, reporting that the rumours where simply that, rumours.
When this information was passed to a well respected blogger, who subsequently published it on his blog, legal action was threatened unless Kate's answer, via her webmaster, was withdrawn from his blog.
Now my question is this. If the McCanns hadn't asked to settle, and where indeed telling the truth that it was only a rumour, why the need to threaten legal action to have Kate's answer withdrawn from the public domain ?
I'd have to see the full trail of correspondence from both sides before I could comment on that. It sounds to me like another typical doubter deliberate misunderstanding. The fact remains - the McCanns did not settle on Amaral's terms, contrary to what we were told by many (including if memory serves by the "well respected" (sic) blogger).
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: faithlilly on June 16, 2014, 06:28:27 PM
I'd have to see the full trail of correspondence from both sides before I could comment on that. It sounds to me like another typical doubter deliberate misunderstanding. The fact remains - the McCanns did not settle on Amaral's terms, contrary to what we were told by many (including if memory serves by the "well respected" (sic) blogger).
I have seen the correspondence and there is no misunderstanding.
Even you must admit it is strange that the McCann's representative wanted to suppress the information, if everything was as you are leading us to believe.
As to the McCanns not settling, I suspect that may have been Dr Amaral's decision and not theirs.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Alfred R Jones on June 16, 2014, 06:30:26 PM
I have seen the correspondence and there is no misunderstanding.
Even you must admit it is strange that the McCann's representative wanted to suppress the information, if everything was as you are leading us to believe.
As to the McCanns not settling, I suspect that may have been Dr Amaral's decision and not theirs.
What am I leading you to believe?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: faithlilly on June 16, 2014, 06:42:36 PM
Now, now it's not like you to be coy Alfred. I think we both know the answer to that.
Seriously - what have I led you to believe? You're trying to make out that I'm being misleading or devious and so I'd like to know what I'm being accused of, thanks.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: faithlilly on June 16, 2014, 06:48:53 PM
Seriously - what have I led you to believe? You're trying to make out that I'm being misleading or devious and so I'd like to know what I'm being accused of, thanks.
I don't think you're being devious. I think you fully believe what you write.
That doesn't, however, stop it from being blinkered.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Alfred R Jones on June 16, 2014, 06:49:26 PM
I don't think you're being devious. I think you fully believe what you write.
That doesn't, however, stop it from being blinkered.
OK - so what did I write that was blinkered?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Alfred R Jones on June 16, 2014, 06:54:05 PM
Let's do this in stages, looking at what I wrote:
Quote
I'd have to see the full trail of correspondence from both sides before I could comment on that
. Is that the blinkered bit? No, I don't think so.
Quote
It sounds to me like another typical doubter deliberate misunderstanding.
That's me expressing my opinion, not a fact, so I'm not leading you to believe anything, just expressing my doubts about your unsubstantiated allegation.
Quote
The fact remains - the McCanns did not settle on Amaral's terms, contrary to what we were told by many (including if memory serves by the "well respected" (sic) blogger).
Did the McCanns settle on Amaral's terms? No they did not. Therefore to state this is a fact is not leading you to believe anything that isn't factual.
So - I repeat, what am I leading you to believe Faithlilly?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Jean-Pierre on June 16, 2014, 07:04:34 PM
I have seen the correspondence and there is no misunderstanding.
Even you must admit it is strange that the McCann's representative wanted to suppress the information, if everything was as you are leading us to believe.
As to the McCanns not settling, I suspect that may have been Dr Amaral's decision and not theirs.
Perhaps you would be kind enough to provide a link to this correspondence, Faith,
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: faithlilly on June 16, 2014, 07:11:34 PM
Let's do this in stages, looking at what I wrote: . Is that the blinkered bit? No, I don't think so.That's me expressing my opinion, not a fact, so I'm not leading you to believe anything, just expressing my doubts about your unsubstantiated allegation.
Did the McCanns settle on Amaral's terms? No they did not. Therefore to state this is a fact is not leading you to believe anything that isn't factual.
So - I repeat, what am I leading you to believe Faithlilly?
'The McCanns didn't settle on Amaral's terms '.
I repeat perhaps it was Amaral who wouldn't settle, no matter what the enticement.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Alfred R Jones on June 16, 2014, 07:23:15 PM
I repeat perhaps it was Amaral who wouldn't settle, no matter what the enticement.
You seem to have forgotten my original point which was that were were informed, some months ago, in no uncertain terms by several prominent doubters, that the McCanns had settled on Amaral's terms. Clearly they were making shit up, right? Or perhaps you prefer the term "leading us to believe"...
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Eleanor on June 17, 2014, 08:51:33 AM
His latest theory about dead children in other people's coffins in a local church has stunned The World. I can't help wondering if the rest of "His Team" agree with that little gem.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: stephen25000 on June 17, 2014, 09:11:33 AM
His latest theory about dead children in other people's coffins in a local church has stunned The World. I can't help wondering if the rest of "His Team" agree with that little gem.
It has not been established yet what happened to Madeleine.
I believe gerry mccann himself said all theories should be investigated.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: jassi on June 17, 2014, 09:17:17 AM
The funeral addition theory is ridiculous. Funeral companies do not use the church as storage.
The latest 'theory' that the Drs McCann disposed of Madeleine's body by putting her into a coffin with a dead woman verges on the insane. I do not say that lightly.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Montclair on June 17, 2014, 04:14:34 PM
The funeral addition theory is ridiculous. Funeral companies do not use the church as storage.
In Portugal the coffins with the deceased are kept in the church or the misericórdia for at least a day before the funeral so that people can pay their respects and sign the condolences book. The coffins are then taken directly from the church in the hearse to the cemetary with mourners following or to the cremation site. I have been to enough funerals here to know how it works.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: ferryman on June 17, 2014, 04:18:41 PM
The latest 'theory' that the Drs McCann disposed of Madeleine's body by putting her into a coffin with a dead woman verges on the insane. I do not say that lightly.
At one time, one of the few things I gave Amaral credit for was that he distanced himself from Before May 3rd nutters.
But now ...
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Cudge on June 17, 2014, 06:54:02 PM
In Portugal the coffins with the deceased are kept in the church or the misericórdia for at least a day before the funeral so that people can pay their respects and sign the condolences book. The coffins are then taken directly from the church in the hearse to the cemetary with mourners following or to the cremation site. I have been to enough funerals here to know how it works.
Are the coffins normally open or closed ?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: pegasus on June 17, 2014, 07:29:49 PM
In Portugal the coffins with the deceased are kept in the church or the misericórdia for at least a day before the funeral so that people can pay their respects and sign the condolences book. The coffins are then taken directly from the church in the hearse to the cemetary with mourners following or to the cremation site. I have been to enough funerals here to know how it works.
I checked - I was wrong - you are correct. However I still think Mr Amaral is going down the wrong track with that idea.
An intelligent person, if aware that specialist dogs had arrived, could with a little thinking soon find a far superior and less risky and vastly easier to do solution. Which places would such dogs never locate? Basically stand on the shore, and 180 degrees of your view is all places Eddie can find, whereas the other 180 degrees is places Eddie can't find.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Mr Gray on June 17, 2014, 07:35:50 PM
that church must be full of cadaver scent...did kate ever go in there
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: pathfinder73 on June 17, 2014, 07:59:43 PM
I checked - I was wrong - you are correct. However I still think Mr Amaral is going down the wrong track with that idea.
An intelligent person, if aware that specialist dogs had arrived, could with a little thinking soon find a far superior and less risky and vastly easier to do solution. Which places would such dogs never locate? Basically stand on the shore, and 180 degrees of your view is all places Eddie can find, whereas the other 180 degrees is places Eddie can't find.
I agree that it's risky. Get on the case Pegasus and find out who's funeral took place at PDL church in the first week of June 07. I had ping discrepancies on that weekend 2/3 JUNE (a month later). With keys they could enter the church at 4am/5am and nobody would know.
2 June diary Finally went to church for 10 minutes.
Private worship (despairing!).
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: pathfinder73 on June 17, 2014, 08:20:14 PM
Has Amaral been watching Columbo 8)-)))
Murder by Cremation: In "Ashes to Ashes", mortician Eric Prince gets rid of gossip reporter Verity Chandler in this way. He bludgeons her, then puts her corpse in a coffin, switching it with a different man's body scheduled for cremation, then Chandler is cremated and her ashes are scattered by helicopter over the hills.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Brietta on June 17, 2014, 09:14:54 PM
.............and we know what happened to the local priest don't we ? 8)-)))
We know what was alleged to have happened, but it is all just another forum myth, which has been refuted many times. Unfortunately there are those about who much prefer the lie to the truth.
Now, Stephen, if you just pop back into the files and read Father Pacheco's statement. You will see he speaks no English. So he did not hear the Dr McCanns' confessions.
Relying on such untruths to propagate your fantasy reflects very badly.
Praia da Luz priest denies reports in UK newspaper By: CECÍLIA PIREScecilia@portugalresident.com
PRAIA DA Luz church is receiving the image of Our Lady of Fátima on Monday, December 18, in a special visit to the region and this is the reason why ribbons and images of Madeleine McCann have been temporarily removed from its interior, according to father José Manuel Pacheco, the local catholic priest .
Praia da Luz’s community “has not forgotten the little British girl and special prayers are still being held every Friday,” father José Manuel Pacheco told The Resident.
The catholic priest was reacting to reports in the UK’s Daily Express in which he is said to have “ordered the removal of scores of green and yellow ribbons which were put up as a symbol of hope in the days after Madeleine vanished”.
The British newspaper quotes a “close friend to the priest” as saying that the latter “can’t even hear the Madeleine case mentioned without becoming irate.”
A statement that father José Manuel Pacheco describes as “barbarity” and a “lie”.
“I do not know who that ‘friend’ might be, but I doubt such person is my friend”, he told The Resident.Father José Manuel Pacheco ensures that “priests have no power to order anything in our churches. We have an entity for that, which is the Conselho Pastoral, where the catholic community is represented”.
Church key With regards to the key to Praia da Luz church that the McCanns were given after Madeleine went missing, so that the couple could pray in privacy, “that was a decision made by the Conselho Pastoral and I only knew about it three days later”.
Father José Manuel Pacheco said:
“Madeleine McCann’s parents know that we support them and that is the most important thing. The family kept very close and good relations with the church and its representatives in Praia da Luz”.
Madeleine McCann has now been missing for 225 days and her parents renew appeals every day looking for “that piece of information” that will lead to her being found.
In contrast, the police investigation being carried out in Portugal continues to focus on the couple as the main suspects for her probable death.
If you have any information on the whereabouts of Madeleine McCann, please contact the McCann helpline on +34 902 300 213 or the Portuguese Police on +351 282 405 400. Do you have a view on this story? Email: editor@portugalresident.com http://portugalresident.com/praia-da-luz-priest-denies-reports-in-uk-newspaper
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: stephen25000 on June 17, 2014, 09:19:01 PM
We know what was alleged to have happened, but it is all just another forum myth, which has been refuted many times. Unfortunately there are those about who much prefer the lie to the truth.
Now, Stephen, if you just pop back into the files and read Father Pacheco's statement. You will see he speaks no English. So he did not hear the Dr McCanns' confessions.
Relying on such untruths to propagate your fantasy reflects very badly.
Praia da Luz priest denies reports in UK newspaper By: CECÍLIA PIREScecilia@portugalresident.com
PRAIA DA Luz church is receiving the image of Our Lady of Fátima on Monday, December 18, in a special visit to the region and this is the reason why ribbons and images of Madeleine McCann have been temporarily removed from its interior, according to father José Manuel Pacheco, the local catholic priest .
Praia da Luz’s community “has not forgotten the little British girl and special prayers are still being held every Friday,” father José Manuel Pacheco told The Resident.
The catholic priest was reacting to reports in the UK’s Daily Express in which he is said to have “ordered the removal of scores of green and yellow ribbons which were put up as a symbol of hope in the days after Madeleine vanished”.
The British newspaper quotes a “close friend to the priest” as saying that the latter “can’t even hear the Madeleine case mentioned without becoming irate.”
A statement that father José Manuel Pacheco describes as “barbarity” and a “lie”.
“I do not know who that ‘friend’ might be, but I doubt such person is my friend”, he told The Resident.Father José Manuel Pacheco ensures that “priests have no power to order anything in our churches. We have an entity for that, which is the Conselho Pastoral, where the catholic community is represented”.
Church key With regards to the key to Praia da Luz church that the McCanns were given after Madeleine went missing, so that the couple could pray in privacy, “that was a decision made by the Conselho Pastoral and I only knew about it three days later”.
Father José Manuel Pacheco said:
“Madeleine McCann’s parents know that we support them and that is the most important thing. The family kept very close and good relations with the church and its representatives in Praia da Luz”.
Madeleine McCann has now been missing for 225 days and her parents renew appeals every day looking for “that piece of information” that will lead to her being found.
In contrast, the police investigation being carried out in Portugal continues to focus on the couple as the main suspects for her probable death.
If you have any information on the whereabouts of Madeleine McCann, please contact the McCann helpline on +34 902 300 213 or the Portuguese Police on +351 282 405 400. Do you have a view on this story? Email: editor@portugalresident.com http://portugalresident.com/praia-da-luz-priest-denies-reports-in-uk-newspaper
Do you have a statement directly from him and not through another source ?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Mr Gray on June 17, 2014, 09:28:59 PM
Do you have a statement directly from him and not through another source ?
you have no statement at all...guaranteed
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: faithlilly on June 17, 2014, 10:47:05 PM
Lest we forget.
From the Guardian ( Alfred's source of choice ).
British police helped to "develop evidence" against Madeleine McCann's parents as they were investigated by Portuguese police as formal suspects in the disappearance of their daughter, the US ambassador to Portugal was told by his British counterpart in September 2007.
The meeting between US ambassador Al Hoffman and the British ambassador, Alexander Wykeham Ellis, took place a fortnight after Kate and Gerry McCann were formally declared arguidos, or suspects, by Portuguese police. The McCanns have said that there was "absolutely no evidence to implicate them in Madeleine's disappearance whatsoever."
In a diplomatic cable marked confidential, the US ambassador reported: "Without delving into the details of the case, Ellis admitted that the British police had developed the current evidence against the McCann parents, and he stressed that authorities from both countries were working co-operatively."
The comments attributed to the ambassador appear to contradict the widespread perception at the time that Portuguese investigators were the driving force behind the treatment of the McCanns as suspects in the case.
The disclosure comes as WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange returns to court in an attempt to secure bail following his arrest last week at the request of Swedish authorities who want to interview him over allegations of sexual assault. A number of other cables released by the whistleblowers' website shed new light on aspects of the financial crisis. Revelations include:
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Alfred R Jones on June 17, 2014, 10:50:33 PM
British police helped to "develop evidence" against Madeleine McCann's parents as they were investigated by Portuguese police as formal suspects in the disappearance of their daughter, the US ambassador to Portugal was told by his British counterpart in September 2007.
The meeting between US ambassador Al Hoffman and the British ambassador, Alexander Wykeham Ellis, took place a fortnight after Kate and Gerry McCann were formally declared arguidos, or suspects, by Portuguese police. The McCanns have said that there was "absolutely no evidence to implicate them in Madeleine's disappearance whatsoever."
In a diplomatic cable marked confidential, the US ambassador reported: "Without delving into the details of the case, Ellis admitted that the British police had developed the current evidence against the McCann parents, and he stressed that authorities from both countries were working co-operatively."
The comments attributed to the ambassador appear to contradict the widespread perception at the time that Portuguese investigators were the driving force behind the treatment of the McCanns as suspects in the case.
The disclosure comes as WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange returns to court in an attempt to secure bail following his arrest last week at the request of Swedish authorities who want to interview him over allegations of sexual assault. A number of other cables released by the whistleblowers' website shed new light on aspects of the financial crisis. Revelations include:
Did you post this just to have a dig at me or is there some relevance to the preceding discussion which I have missed?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: faithlilly on June 17, 2014, 10:57:36 PM
Did you post this just to have a dig at me or is there some relevance to the preceding discussion which I have missed?
My goodness I didn't have you down for the paranoid sort Alfred.
I posted the article to remind readers that Amaral wasn't the only policeman involved in constructing the theory that Madeleine died in 5a and her parents concealed her body.
A timely reminder I'm sure you'll agree.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Alfred R Jones on June 17, 2014, 11:05:43 PM
My goodness I didn't have you down for the paranoid sort Alfred.
I posted the article to remind readers that Amaral wasn't the only policeman involved in constructing the theory that Madeleine died in 5a and her parents concealed her body.
A timely reminder I'm sure you'll agree.
He WAS the only police office who made a fortune out of selling his theory though, if I recall correctly.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: faithlilly on June 17, 2014, 11:09:46 PM
The funeral addition theory is ridiculous. Funeral companies do not use the church as storage.
When my wife and I were having our wedding rehearsal, there was a coffin at the alter waiting for a funeral the next day, in my work, we often take a coffin into church the previous day, especially Catholic Churches.
P.S. The lids are held down with 4 screws.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: carlymichelle on June 17, 2014, 11:31:03 PM
When my wife and I were having our wedding rehearsal, there was a coffin at the alter waiting for a funeral the next day, in my work, we often take a coffin into church the previous day, especially Catholic Churches.
P.S. The lids are held down with 4 screws.
are the screws easy to lunlock??
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Cudge on June 17, 2014, 11:33:07 PM
When my wife and I were having our wedding rehearsal, there was a coffin at the alter waiting for a funeral the next day, in my work, we often take a coffin into church the previous day, especially Catholic Churches.
P.S. The lids are held down with 4 screws.
What about at open casket funerals ?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: slartibartfast on June 18, 2014, 12:01:47 AM
Just to be clear, what evidence did UK police help provide that Madeleine was dead and her parents involved?
They didn't. It wasn't their place to do so. But I believe that they put forward suggestions in line with how the investigation would have been conducted in Britain. Which is what Scotland Yard are doing now. Scotland Yard have also said that they do not believe that The McCanns were involved.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: faithlilly on June 18, 2014, 11:36:48 AM
In which case your only conclusion in answering this thread must be "no, Amaral's thesis is not credible" - you could go so far as to say it's downright INcredible. As for your second statement I believe that's more libel on your part and will have to be reported.
Parts of Amaral's thesis, I believe, are not credible.
As to libel, didn't Martin Smith and his wife say that the man they saw was more than likely ( 60-80% ) Gerry ?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Alfred R Jones on June 18, 2014, 11:39:09 AM
Parts of Amaral's thesis, I believe, are not credible.
As to libel, didn't Martin Smith and his wife say that the man they saw was more than likely ( 60-80% ) Gerry ?
He was giving evidence to the police, which is exempt from accusations of libel - you on the other hand are just passing time on the internet, making libellous comments like that one, and so are not exempt from the laws of libel of this country.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: faithlilly on June 18, 2014, 11:41:03 AM
He was giving evidence to the police, which is exempt from accusations of libel - you on the other hand are just passing time on the internet, making libellous comments like that one, and so are not exempt from the laws of libel of this country.
Now stop being silly Alfred.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Alfred R Jones on June 18, 2014, 12:03:14 PM
Parts of Amaral's thesis, I believe, are not credible.
As to libel, didn't Martin Smith and his wife say that the man they saw was more than likely ( 60-80% ) Gerry ?
I thought it was only Martin Smith. Others, who were in Martin's company, including his wife, did not agree with this claim of seeing a clone of Gerry.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: faithlilly on June 18, 2014, 12:17:35 PM
I thought it was only Martin Smith. Others, who were in Martin's company, including his wife, did not agree with this claim of seeing a clone of Gerry.
Martin Smith's wife agreed but she didn't want to make another statement.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: slartibartfast on June 18, 2014, 12:45:32 PM
I thought it was only Martin Smith. Others, who were in Martin's company, including his wife, did not agree with this claim of seeing a clone of Gerry.
None of the others said it wasn't....
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Brietta on June 18, 2014, 02:20:17 PM
My goodness I didn't have you down for the paranoid sort Alfred.
I posted the article to remind readers that Amaral wasn't the only policeman involved in constructing the theory that Madeleine died in 5a and her parents concealed her body.
A timely reminder I'm sure you'll agree.
Strange isn't it that no British police officer is on record as subscribing to that theory once they had read - and more importantly - understood - the forensic results from the case. They are trained to follow evidence - not theory - and there was no evidence to support Dr Amaral's theory.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: faithlilly on June 18, 2014, 02:36:13 PM
Strange isn't it that no British police officer is on record as subscribing to that theory once they had read - and more importantly - understood - the forensic results from the case. They are trained to follow evidence - not theory - and there was no evidence to support Dr Amaral's theory.
There is no British police officer on record saying anything with regard to the original investigation.
So what exactly does that prove ?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Eleanor on June 18, 2014, 02:41:35 PM
They didn't. It wasn't their place to do so. But I believe that they put forward suggestions in line with how the investigation would have been conducted in Britain. Which is what Scotland Yard are doing now. Scotland Yard have also said that they do not believe that The McCanns were involved.
I'm not at all sure that Scotland Yard ever took much credence of Dr Amaral's implausible 'theory'.
I have no doubt they went back to the very beginning and took every scenario on board.
Once they had read and analysed the information contained in the files I believe they are following evidence which was summarily discarded in 2007. They are eliminating lines of inquiry as they progress the case.
That was probably what was behind the recent digging. I do not believe they are looking for Madeleine in Praia Da Luz, I think they are looking for the evidence which will lead them to where she was taken and by whom. I think that information lies with those they wish to interview in Praia Da Luz.
I am of the opinion that is where the PJ and the Met investigations diversify.
The PJ are looking to find answers in PDL.
The Met are looking further afield. I think that if ever we do get a solution to what happened to Madeleine McCann it is going to rock certain individuals to the core; and it is my firm belief the Met will bring this investigation to fruition in the coming months; they have indeed warned this will be a long haul.
Incidentally, I wonder how deep their contempt runs for the latest theory and its author?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Eleanor on June 18, 2014, 03:16:25 PM
So there is nothing to be gauged from any participating British police officer remaining silent with regard to the case.
Thank you Eleanor.
The UK FLOs who are trained to observe and who spent many hours with the McCanns reported that they saw nothing suspicious in their behaviour at any time.
Very pertinent IMO.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: faithlilly on June 18, 2014, 03:24:44 PM
I'm not at all sure that Scotland Yard ever took much credence of Dr Amaral's implausible 'theory'.
I have no doubt they went back to the very beginning and took every scenario on board.
Once they had read and analysed the information contained in the files I believe they are following evidence which was summarily discarded in 2007. They are eliminating lines of inquiry as they progress the case.
That was probably what was behind the recent digging. I do not believe they are looking for Madeleine in Praia Da Luz, I think they are looking for the evidence which will lead them to where she was taken and by whom. I think that information lies with those they wish to interview in Praia Da Luz.
I am of the opinion that is where the PJ and the Met investigations diversify.
The PJ are looking to find answers in PDL.
The Met are looking further afield. I think that if ever we do get a solution to what happened to Madeleine McCann it is going to rock certain individuals to the core; and it is my firm belief the Met will bring this investigation to fruition in the coming months; they have indeed warned this will be a long haul.
Incidentally, I wonder how deep their contempt runs for the latest theory and its author?
That's a lot of 'I believes' Brietta.
Have you any solid evidence at all for your 'beliefs' ?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Mr Gray on June 18, 2014, 03:26:27 PM
So you mean no....indicative evidence..not evidence...
Of course it is, it simply carries less weight.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on June 19, 2014, 11:02:36 PM
I think Mr Amaral's theory has more credence that the abduction- I am not saying I agree with it.
The thing lost in this is; the fact that Mr Amarla's Thesis does not say he believed the parents murdered their child. He believed the child had an accident of some sort- and that should have been investigated-with out interference.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Brietta on June 20, 2014, 01:22:09 AM
Have you any solid evidence at all for your 'beliefs' ?
If I had solid evidence Faithlilly ~ who would have the need of either the PJ or the Met?
What I do have is opinion as everyone who posts here is entitled to have. However I base my opinion on observation of the progression of events and am content to watch the case into Madeleine's disappearance as it progresses.
What I can state categorically is that both the PJ and the Met have discarded Dr Amaral's theory - or should that be theories as they seem to be going through a process of revision from fridges to coffins to who knows what next.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: colombosstogey on June 20, 2014, 05:31:53 AM
I think Mr Amaral's theory has more credence that the abduction- I am not saying I agree with it.
The thing lost in this is; the fact that Mr Amarla's Thesis does not say he believed the parents murdered their child. He believed the child had an accident of some sort- and that should have been investigated-with out interference.
EXACTLY.
The thing is these things do happen all the time, and parents cry ABDUCTION all the time and hide bodies.
ITS FACT it HAPPENS, its not FICTION.
Why was it so abhorrent to even think the McCanns could have covered up a death?
Especially in light of the fact that they had lackadaisical care in place, which would put a child at risk of accident.
Children have fatal accidents even with the parent within yards of them in a another room for example, and a child gets into trouble and dies.
The Accident and Emergency departments are full of them and many sadly fatal.
Children strangled by blind cords comes to mind, falling out of windows, swallowing bleach and tablets eek when i had my kids I was paranoid about it.
We were taught NEVER leave your children for a minute without supervision.
Even then something would happen, child in bath, the phone or door bell goes, your mind switches off to danger and you go answer it and when you come back in minutes a child is found dead in the bath.
Or falling down stairs is another one.
Or running out of a door and into the path of a car is another one (my best friends sister died like that right in front of her mother one lapse one moment and she was gone).
Those most at risk from a home accident are the 0-4 years age group. Falls account for the majority of non-fatal accidents while the highest number of deaths are due to fire. Most of these accidents are preventable through increased awareness, improvements in the home environment and greater product safety
IF the McCanns did a risk assessment they would have seen that their children were exposed to many danger elements.
Windows/falling Door/steep steps Steep steps/road Floors/hard no soft coverings (carpet) Cooker/heat burning Full glass window/falling Settee/falling Bed near window/falling Wander out/road/swimming pool/traffic
So the odds really of leaving children alone under 4 was pretty high for an accident to occur even with the parents in situ.
The largest number of accidents happen in the living/dining room.
However, the most serious accidents happen in the kitchen and on the stairs.
Every year more than 67,000 children experience an accident in the kitchen - 43,000 of these are aged between 0-4 years; 58,000 children have accidents on the stairs.
So the chances of one of them falling down the stairs was pretty high. The stair gate at the top even worse, as children are known to simply climb over them which makes the fall even more likely it could become fatal.
So with all that in mind is it so far fetched this theory that the child died in an accident and the family panicked and hid the body. NO.
It happens, it does happen, and it will happen again.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: stephen25000 on June 20, 2014, 07:03:11 AM
I think Mr Amaral's theory has more credence that the abduction- I am not saying I agree with it.
The thing lost in this is; the fact that Mr Amarla's Thesis does not say he believed the parents murdered their child. He believed the child had an accident of some sort- and that should have been investigated-with out interference.
Why, then, was Harrison handed a brief by the PJ to consider that Madeleine had been "murdered"?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: stephen25000 on June 20, 2014, 07:47:37 AM
Also point out exactly where Grime says the dogs reactions could not be indicative of Madeleine's remains.
Grime says the dogs alerts have no evidential value...which part of that statetment do you and others not understand..its quite simple
Correction - The Martin Grime Report states, "No evidential or intelligence reliability can be made from this alert unless it can be confirmed with corroborating evidence." www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES.htm
Mr Moderator
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: stephen25000 on June 20, 2014, 07:54:04 AM
Personally I think Madeleine was abducted bu a person or persons unknown.
A belief and no more than a belief.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: pegasus on June 20, 2014, 01:58:42 PM
(Source: El Mundo 6 Sept 2008, http://www.mccannfiles.com/id165.html ) Interviewer: "... and the parents find her." Mr Amaral: "The mother. It is the mother who finds ..."
That is one of several examples in Mr Amaral's theory where he makes a categorically incorrect deduction.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: xtina on June 20, 2014, 02:11:14 PM
People are not doubting an abduction for the fun of it........many thousands of people have followed the case from the start because it concerns a small child ......
people spew hate at Goncalo Amaral because he seeks truth and justice for a child,............
[Purely speculative comment removed]
maddie did nothing to deserve what happened to her ...apart from trust her parents ..to keep her safe ....they didn't..
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: pathfinder73 on June 20, 2014, 02:34:03 PM
(Source: El Mundo 6 Sept 2008, http://www.mccannfiles.com/id165.html ) Interviewer: "... and the parents find her." Mr Amaral: "The mother. It is the mother who finds ..."
That is one of several examples in Mr Amaral's theory where he makes a categorically incorrect deduction.
Focus – How do you defend the "accidental" death?
G.A. – There is indicia behind the sofa [of the McCanns' living room]. The sofa is under a window that looks onto the street, which is three or four metres high. It is normal behaviour, and justice deals with normal behaviour, that the parents would have moved the sofa away from the window, given the fact that they had small children and alone at home. The window was easy to open and the shutters were not functioning…
Focus – But why "accidental"?
G.A. - I don't say it's accidental. Up to that moment, we could only reach an accidental death, because we had not worked on the rest yet. We had yet to understand what had happened there. Cadaver odour and blood from the child appear next to the sofa. Death has presumably taken place there. There are no doubts that it is a death and that it took place on that spot. We are not going to say that the mother did this or that, that would really be speculating, the only hypothesis is the accidental death. In the continuation of the investigations is where we could go further or not.
Gonçalo Amaral interview, 13 August 2008 www.mccannfiles.com/id165.html
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Eleanor on June 20, 2014, 02:38:43 PM
So Amaral was really looking at Murder. Thought so.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: pathfinder73 on June 20, 2014, 02:42:00 PM
So Amaral was really looking at Murder. Thought so.
Any investigator would if they thought a death was covered up. You don't cover up and get rid of the body for a tragic accidental death but murder, child abuse etc. and for no autopsy to be performed YES.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: jassi on June 20, 2014, 02:49:02 PM
Operation Grange is conducted by the Homicide & Serious Crime Command, so presumably they aren't discounting murder either.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on June 20, 2014, 03:20:15 PM
There is a difference between suspicion and knowing. The police look at the picture in small pieces-place them together and see what they come up with-they suspect such and such may have happened and then they try to make a case-seek witnesses and procure evidence.
That is what police do! Should they make an exception in this case? I mean how cruel can a police force be to suspect parents of any wrong doing
The West family-murdered their daughter, and others Phill and maraid Potts burned their 6 children alive...Oh I can't bring myself to add any more it is too distressing-but you get my point? The police suspected then- investigated.
It may not have been pre meditated murder-it could have been- Maddie fell and banged her head and when they found her dead they panicked.. OR, Maddie found some pills and swallowed them thinking they were sweets-again, the parents find her dead and panic..all very plausible scenarios, along with many more I could mention. All worth investigating. It would be easier finding a body or something with definitive match to Maddie being in a place where it was not her 'normal' place to be in her holiday duration.
Police should ALWAYS be suspicious, it is part of their job to be.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Mr Gray on June 20, 2014, 03:52:23 PM
There is a difference between suspicion and knowing. The police look at the picture in small pieces-place them together and see what they come up with-they suspect such and such may have happened and then they try to make a case-seek witnesses and procure evidence.
That is what police do! Should they make an exception in this case? I mean how cruel can a police force be to suspect parents of any wrong doing
The West family-murdered their daughter, and others Phill and maraid Potts burned their 6 children alive...Oh I can't bring myself to add any more it is too distressing-but you get my point? The police suspected then- investigated.
It may not have been pre meditated murder-it could have been- Maddie fell and banged her head and when they found her dead they panicked.. OR, Maddie found some pills and swallowed them thinking they were sweets-again, the parents find her dead and panic..all very plausible scenarios, along with many more I could mention. All worth investigating. It would be easier finding a body or something with definitive match to Maddie being in a place where it was not her 'normal' place to be in her holiday duration.
Police should ALWAYS be suspicious, it is part of their job to be.
The police should always be suspicious and investigate parents. They should rule out or charge as soon as possible. The PJ failed to do this. SY will have done things properly
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Martina on June 20, 2014, 03:54:16 PM
The police should always be suspicious and investigate parents. They should rule out or charge as soon as possible. The PJ failed to do this. SY will have done things properly
If the McCanns are innocent why Kate refused to answer these questions? She would help the PJ to rule her out doing that!
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Mr Gray on June 20, 2014, 03:56:10 PM
If the McCanns are innocent why Kate refused to answer these questions? She would help the PJ to rule her out doing that!
Just to add this has been discussed ad nauseam...kate was absolutely right not to answer the stupid questions she was asked ...considering she had already answered questions for many hours
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Montclair on June 20, 2014, 05:44:49 PM
The cipriano case is a similar case involving amaral where he managed to get a conviction with basically no evidence. perhaps he thought he could do the same here and is therefore highly relevant
So, Gonçalo Amaral managed to convict Leonor and João Cipriano all by himself, with no Ministério Público, no prosecutors, no judges, no jury, no investigation, no forensics involved? Don't be ridiculous! An appeal from João Cipriano for parole was just recently rejected by the courts because, according to the judges, he showed no remorse or empathy for the victim. Are you going to blame GA for this too?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Martina on June 20, 2014, 05:50:23 PM
no we blame amaral in his complicity in the torture that supplied the only piece of evidence..the confession
This sentence is the proof of how thickheaded and prejudiced you are because you have been told innumerous times that only confessions made in a court of law in front of a judge can be considered evidence. The fact that you can defend those two people shows that you have no idea how Portuguese justice works. If there had been any flaw in the trial, it would have been brought up in the appeal courts and this did not happen. It is evident that you have only become involved in that case because of your need to defend your lovely couple.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Alfred R Jones on June 20, 2014, 06:08:34 PM
I must be having a piggin' dim day today. Please will some wise person explain where Cipriano fits into Dr Amaral's thesis about the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.
Just a few observations.
The area of the Algarve where Joana and Madeleine disappeared is a very under-populated area. The girls, both under 10, went missing within a short timeframe and within a small area. Neither of their bodies has yet been found. This is either a startling and unfortunate coincidence or perhaps their disappearances are connected. I struggle to think of any other disappearances of children from such a small area and within such a short timeframe anywhere else in the world that were unconnected but may be there are some examples I'm unaware of.
The man in charge of both investigations decided that in both cases the parents dunnit. In both cases fridges or freezers featured prominently in his theories, as did macabre and unproven scenarios such as "fed to the pigs" & cremated in old woman's coffin." There was no forensic evidence to prove either child died in the way that he claimed they did, or was disposed of in the way that he claimed.
These are a few of the reasons why the Cipriano case is of interest to those who believe Madeleine was most likely abducted. Some of us wonder if the two cases are connected somehow, despite the fact that the Ciprianos confessed - maybe there is an element of their daughter's disappearance that wasn't fully revealed at the time, or maybe they (being simple folk) they confessed to something they didn't actually do - it wouldn't be the first time, now would it?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Benice on June 21, 2014, 12:58:28 AM
Yes - it was British journalists. I thought everyone knew that.
This could be Lorri Campbell! Date of her report to the police was 6th May. So it is documented.
But is this REALLY correct, Benice? For discover the one and only truth you may have to read Amarals book a bit more intently 8((()*/ In the first part of chapter 7 he describes, that he himself was THE MAN, who perceives R.Murat in the morning of 11th May as a suspicious-looking character. After a very long and stressful night (with a lot interviews/meetings until 2'oclock in the morning plus bury his dead dog also in the same night) he drove the direct way from Olhão to PDL - to check the crime-area. Curiously no one saw him wandering alone through the streets next to OC (for sure there weren't any reporters or officers at that time). Suddenly he spotted a strange looking man with his mother, in front of their house. A bit later he saw this man talking to a GNR-officer. Apparently this guy was R. Murat. After this "observation" Amaral immediately phoned his team to alert them about R.Murat.
However this whole story is quite strange, because R.Murat had been in Portimão that morning. He did translation-jobs for the PJ-Inspector Pedro Varanda (DW for example).
So - what do you think about this episode? IMO this story is rubbish - Amaral just wanted (at all cost) express his competence as a first-class investigator. The whole description in this chapter is untrustworthy and full of pathos - from the nightly funeral of his dog (between 3-4 o'clock) till his random detection of R.Murat in the next morning. Incredible!
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Mr Gray on June 21, 2014, 01:03:04 PM
This could be Lorri Campbell! Date of her report to the police was 6th May. So it is documented.
But is this REALLY correct, Benice? For discover the one and only truth you may have to read Amarals book a bit more intently 8((()*/ In the first part of chapter 7 he describes, that he himself was THE MAN, who perceives R.Murat in the morning of 11th May as a suspicious-looking character. After a very long and stressful night (with a lot interviews/meetings until 2'oclock in the morning plus bury his dead dog also in the same night) he drove the direct way from Olhão to PDL - to check the crime-area. Curiously no one saw him wandering alone through the streets next to OC (for sure there weren't any reporters or officers at that time). Suddenly he spotted a strange looking man with his mother, in front of their house. A bit later he saw this man talking to a GNR-officer. Apparently this guy was R. Murat. After this "observation" Amaral immediately phoned his team to alert them about R.Murat.
However this whole story is quite strange, because R.Murat had been in Portimão that morning. He did translation-jobs for the PJ-Inspector Pedro Varanda (DW for example).
So - what do you think about this episode? IMO this story is rubbish - Amaral just wanted (at all cost) express his competence as a first-class investigator. The whole description in this chapter is untrustworthy and full of pathos - from the nightly funeral of his dog (between 3-4 o'clock) till his random detection of R.Murat in the next morning. Incredible!
amaral has been proven in court to lie...his word cannot be trusted IMO
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Mr Gray on June 21, 2014, 03:27:56 PM
He was an interpreter first and foremost. It was only later that he became a suspect so your clowns remark is both wrong and contemptible.
you stated that amaral wanted to keep him as an interpreter to keep tabs on him....so amaral suspected him but allowed him to remain as an interpreter...
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Eleanor on June 21, 2014, 03:33:21 PM
I think that Amaral needed Robert Murat to be involved because he knew that The McCanns couldn't have pulled off his Thesis without local help.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Mr Gray on June 21, 2014, 03:38:47 PM
The interview with Dianne Webster was conducted in Robert Murat's presence on 11th May 2007. This was the day after Gonçalo Amaral observed Murat arriving at his mothers villa in Praia da Luz (10th May). Amaral writes in his book that following the observation he instructed that Murat continue to act as an interpreter in order to keep tabs on him.
So I'm afraid that it is your post that is 'rubbish' as you put it so succinctly being a 'newbie'.
Sorry John, but Amaral describes 2 days. Chapter 7 starts in the night after the statement of Jane Tanner. This statement was on 10th May. The next day he describes his visit in PDL. Therefore he wrote about the event at May 11th, when he allegedly saw Robert Murat.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: John on June 21, 2014, 05:28:32 PM
Sorry John, but Amaral describes 2 days. Chapter 7 starts in the night after the statement of Jane Tanner. This statement was on 10th May. The next day he describes his visit in PDL. Therefore he wrote about the event at May 11th, when he allegedly saw Robert Murat.
I see what you mean, the wording is poor...to quote from the book...
Chapter 7
The Murat Case
On May 10th, the crisis unit's meeting goes on until 2'oclock in the morning.
I receive a phone call from Sofia, who insists on my going home.
What Amaral was trying to explain was that the crisis meeting started on the 10th but continued into the 11th. It was the 11th when he went down to Luz at 8am and reported seeing Robert Murat a short time later. So your observation is that Amaral couldn't have seen Murat shortly after 8am if he was acting as interpreter in Diane Webster's interview from 11.30am.
Am I missing something here because I fail to see why not?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: pegasus on June 21, 2014, 05:31:53 PM
so you have a suspect in a serious case acting as an interpreter...what a load of clowns
and don't forget allowing cueing during a witness interview.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: John on June 21, 2014, 05:42:56 PM
Amaral states in the book that after seeing Murat in Luz early on the 11th May, he telephoned the office in Portimão and instructed them to keep tabs on Murat by continuing his work as an interpreter. No doubt they telephoned Murat and called him in for the Webster interview.
Luz to Portimão is a 33 km - 28 minute trip by car on the motorway or 26km - 30 minute trip via Odiáxere.
One has to remember that there was much urgency at that time. Amaral relates that for all they knew Murat could have been holding the girl in one of his houses. They were desperate to keep tabs on him by all accounts.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: new_observer on June 21, 2014, 06:13:52 PM
I see what you mean, the wording is poor...to quote from the book...
Chapter 7
The Murat Case
On May 10th, the crisis unit's meeting goes on until 2'oclock in the morning.
I receive a phone call from Sofia, who insists on my going home.
What Amaral was trying to explain was that the crisis meeting started on the 10th but continued into the 11th. It was the 11th when he went down to Luz at 8am and reported seeing Robert Murat a short time later. So your observation is that Amaral couldn't have seen Murat shortly after 8am if he was acting as interpreter in Diane Webster's interview from 11.30am.
Am I missing something here because I fail to see why not?
I think the whole story is absolutely strange. Meetings till 2 o'clock, back home late in the night, bury the dog, talking to his wife, etc. - did he even went to bed this night? I don't know how much time Amaral needs from Olhão to Luz, but surely more than a few minutes (its about 100 KM away). So his morning start at about 8 o'clock. When did he arrive in Luz? He was walking around, and saw Murat several times. Murats translation-job started at 11.30h, so at what time has Murat arrived in Portimao? For me this episode is quite unreliable. After Amaral detect Murat, he had a call with his team? At what time he did this call? Nevertheless Murat made the translation-work? No, John - i don't believe this. But of course his loyalists will do so..
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: new_observer on June 21, 2014, 06:18:13 PM
Amaral states in the book that after seeing Murat in Luz early on the 11th May, he telephoned the office in Portimão and instructed them to keep tabs on Murat by continuing his work as an interpreter. No doubt they telephoned Murat and called him in for the Webster interview.
Luz to Portimão is a 33 km - 28 minute trip by car on the motorway or 26km - 30 minute trip via Odiáxere.
One has to remember that there was much urgency at that time. Amaral relates that for all they knew Murat could have been holding the girl in one of his houses. They were desperate to keep tabs on him by all accounts.
Amaral was working in Portimao, but he lived in Olhão at that time
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Eleanor on June 21, 2014, 06:32:11 PM
I think the whole story is absolutely strange. Meetings till 2 o'clock, back home late in the night, bury the dog, talking to his wife, etc. - did he even went to bed this night? I don't know how much time Amaral needs from Olhão to Luz, but surely more than a few minutes (its about 100 KM away). So his morning start at about 8 o'clock. When did he arrive in Luz? He was walking around, and saw Murat several times. Murats translation-job started at 11.30h, so at what time has Murat arrived in Portimao? For me this episode is quite unreliable. After Amaral detect Murat, he had a call with his team? At what time he did this call? Nevertheless Murat made the translation-work? No, John - i don't believe this. But of course his loyalists will do so..
What a very good spot. Well done.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Mr Gray on June 21, 2014, 06:33:26 PM
I see what you mean, the wording is poor...to quote from the book...
Chapter 7
The Murat Case
On May 10th, the crisis unit's meeting goes on until 2'oclock in the morning.
I receive a phone call from Sofia, who insists on my going home.
What Amaral was trying to explain was that the crisis meeting started on the 10th but continued into the 11th. It was the 11th when he went down to Luz at 8am and reported seeing Robert Murat a short time later. So your observation is that Amaral couldn't have seen Murat shortly after 8am if he was acting as interpreter in Diane Webster's interview from 11.30am.
Am I missing something here because I fail to see why not?
john makes a good point here...nothing particularly wrong with the wording his interpretation was wrong...just as posters take the words of the mccanns...misinterpret and new myths are born
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Mr Gray on June 21, 2014, 06:35:43 PM
I think the whole story is absolutely strange. Meetings till 2 o'clock, back home late in the night, bury the dog, talking to his wife, etc. - did he even went to bed this night? I don't know how much time Amaral needs from Olhão to Luz, but surely more than a few minutes (its about 100 KM away). So his morning start at about 8 o'clock. When did he arrive in Luz? He was walking around, and saw Murat several times. Murats translation-job started at 11.30h, so at what time has Murat arrived in Portimao? For me this episode is quite unreliable. After Amaral detect Murat, he had a call with his team? At what time he did this call? Nevertheless Murat made the translation-work? No, John - i don't believe this. But of course his loyalists will do so..
I think you are wrong to try and take the book as a true literal version of the events and the investigation...that's why amarals in so much trouble...think of it as a story based loosely on the facts
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Eleanor on June 21, 2014, 06:42:17 PM
I think you are wrong to try and take the book as a true literal version of the events and the investigation...that's why amarals in so much trouble...think of it as a story based loosely on the facts
Pure fabrication. In My Opinion.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on June 21, 2014, 08:19:56 PM
The book is based on his Thesis-of a police investigation and report.
I have never read his book. The contents are irrelevant. It is not even a question of me liking him or not.
My voice in this is Justice, and to support his human right to express his freedom of speech. And to support the Portuguese people who have been vilified and were about to have this right removed -a right which KATE N GERRY are afforded in the UK. THEY NEVER SHUT UP ABOUT THEIR THEORY!
This is a Justice forum after all!
There is nothing in the book which caused the delay in Maddie's safe return as we have all been witness to! The circumstantial evidence still points towards a different theory from the McCanns.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Mr Gray on June 21, 2014, 08:39:53 PM
The book is based on his Thesis-of a police investigation and report.
I have never read his book. The contents are irrelevant. It is not even a question of me liking him or not.
My voice in this is Justice, and to support his human right to express his freedom of speech. And to support the Portuguese people who have been vilified and were about to have this right removed -a right which KATE N GERRY are afforded in the UK. THEY NEVER SHUT UP ABOUT THEIR THEORY!
This is a Justice forum after all!
There is nothing in the book which caused the delay in Maddie's safe return as we have all been witness to! The circumstantial evidence still points towards a different theory from the McCanns.
this is not a freedom of speech trial it is a libel trial...and the court will decide..thats what justice is,,,,not afew posters on a forum
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: ferryman on June 21, 2014, 09:08:19 PM
Amaral has fraudulently put words into the mouths of others they never uttered that foster the falsehood that Kate and Gerry know Madeleine is dead, are responsible for her death, have covered up the fact of her death and have launched a fraudulent fund in their daughter's name.
That is why Amaral's thesis is not credible and why he will lose the libel trial.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Mr Gray on June 21, 2014, 09:18:00 PM
Amaral has fraudulently put words into the mouths of others they never uttered that foster the falsehood that Kate and Gerry know Madeleine is dead, are responsible for her death, have covered up the fact of her death and have launched a fraudulent fund in their daughter's name.
That is why Amaral's thesis is not credible and why he will lose the libel trial.
yes...the libel trial...that some posters try to pretend is not a libel trial
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Eleanor on June 21, 2014, 09:20:45 PM
its a libel trial...you haven't got a clue have you
One can't help wondering why they think The McCanns are asking for compensation. Compensation for what? No one asks for compensation without cause. So it must be Libel or Defamation or both.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Mr Gray on June 21, 2014, 09:46:56 PM
I think one thing is for certain given his latest ravings - Amaral is stone cold crazy. He's a paranoid fantasist who makes up all kinds of incredulous nonsense to try and hide the fact that he was rubbish at his job.
yet posters on here regard him as an expert...says a lot about their judgement
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: pegasus on June 21, 2014, 09:52:05 PM
I think one thing is for certain given his latest ravings - Amaral is stone cold crazy. He's a paranoid fantasist who makes up all kinds of incredulous nonsense to try and hide the fact that he was rubbish at his job.
At least he never claimed that actually none of the group had ever used a MW listening service.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on June 21, 2014, 09:54:44 PM
Of course he has every right to have an opinion, and talk freely in his own country about matters which affect him and his fellow countrymen.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Alfred R Jones on June 22, 2014, 12:46:49 PM
The court would have asked Mr Grime who would have said: "No evidential or intelligence reliability can be made from this alert unless it can be confirmed with corroborating evidence." In other words the alerts were of minimal (if you must) value!
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Eleanor on June 22, 2014, 01:23:23 PM
Right. Okay.
The Dogs have no evidential reliability.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Victoria on June 22, 2014, 01:24:53 PM
And thus, no value (from an evidential point of view, though they still have value as an investigative tool)
There is nothing else on the horizon.
..and of course we have the irony of the dogs being used recently in Portugal for the 'searches'.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: pathfinder73 on June 22, 2014, 02:36:05 PM
Daniel's mother arrested after confessed staging the abduction
June 21, 2014, 20h08
Daniel's mother, a child of 23 months who disappeared in Calheta, Madeira, and it appeared after three days in conditions that were unclear, confessed to the Judicial Police who staged the kidnapping.
Daniel's mother arrested after confessed staging the abduction
June 21, 2014, 20h08
Daniel's mother, a child of 23 months who disappeared in Calheta, Madeira, and it appeared after three days in conditions that were unclear, confessed to the Judicial Police who staged the kidnapping.
Daniel's mother arrested after confessed staging the abduction
June 21, 2014, 20h08
Daniel's mother, a child of 23 months who disappeared in Calheta, Madeira, and it appeared after three days in conditions that were unclear, confessed to the Judicial Police who staged the kidnapping.
That's not a particularly useful analogy. In the first example you refer to the string as being unreliable rather than the pulley. In the second example you refer to the rope as having value. The first could be described as both unreliable and without value. The second could be referred to as reliable and having value. So what is your point, other than to demonstrate that reliability and value are interrelated (with value being determined by reliability)
In maths even the zero is a value. Here is one example how the reliability is calculated.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3wLIe4NS0IM
So if we take the oposite action to calculate values according to reliability the value could be anything, as due to the zero reliability the value of the factors defining the reliability is not a stable value, i.e it is not a value that can fit into the reliable zone.
So, in science, which is based on the maths the value of unreliable source would be called a speculation.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Eleanor on June 22, 2014, 03:01:20 PM
We all know what happened to the last Portuguese Mother who "Confessed" to The PJ.
Where did she keep this child for three days? But at least it won't have been in a freezer on this occasion.
Is this the case where the child was found in the middle of nowhere early one morning? So, what's she confessed to, exactly? Selling her child, pretending he was abducted and then what? Did the person she sold him to dump the child? Or did she never get round to selling him and hid him instead? I don't remember Amaral claiming the McCanns had sold Madeleine so where does this case fit in relevance-wise with his hypothesis?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Eleanor on June 22, 2014, 03:16:03 PM
Is this the case where the child was found in the middle of nowhere early one morning? So, what's she confessed to, exactly? Selling her child, pretending he was abducted and then what? Did the person she sold him to dump the child? Or did she never get round to selling him and hid him instead? I don't remember Amaral claiming the McCanns had sold Madeleine so where does this case fit in relevance-wise with his hypothesis?
All mothers are guilty when their children disappear. Don't you know that.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: VIXTE on June 22, 2014, 06:41:28 PM
Contradictions are facts not speculation and they require investigating. A key being used and then not being used is a contradiction. A door not moving then moving is a contradiction. The kids routine not changing then changing is a contradiction. One witness saying he entered the apartment and other witness saying it didn't happen is a contradiction. A window being opened but not used as entry or exit is a contradiction.
A theory of putting a dead child in a coffin which is already in a church is a fantasy.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: jassi on June 22, 2014, 06:43:57 PM
A theory of putting a dead child in a coffin which is already in a church is a fantasy.
And you know that for a fact? - or is it just your opinion?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on June 22, 2014, 06:47:36 PM
I don't believe this theory, however, I defend the right of someone who does.
It has been known that children have been cremated/buried with people who are not their parents.
It is not unbelievable, as a means of getting rid of a body. I am sure it has happened, I just can't recall details sorry.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: VIXTE on June 22, 2014, 08:06:12 PM
Anyone can believe anything. It all depends on the telling. The whole marketing strategy of this world has been developed on the possibility of people believing what someone has told them. A sect members would blindly believe their leaders even if his story is not realistic, this is because the sect leader has developed psychological tools to make them believe.
Believing in story telling is one thing. One man claiming 'he knows it better', because he is more clever than the rest of us has taken a plot in many Hollywood movies. @)(++(*
Anyone can develop a theory and claim his theory is above all other theories. The evidence is what counts.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: stephen25000 on June 22, 2014, 08:10:06 PM
Anyone can believe anything. It all depends on the telling. The whole marketing strategy of this world has been developed on the possibility of people believing what someone has told them. A sect members would blindly believe their leaders even if his story is not realistic, this is because the sect leader has developed psychological tools to make them believe.
Believing in story telling is one thing. One man claiming 'he knows it better', because he is more clever than the rest of us has taken a plot in many Hollywood movies. @)(++(*
Anyone can develop a theory and claim his theory is above all other theories. The evidence is what counts.
and still at the moment 'type of crime unknown'.
So there are different cards on the table.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Eleanor on June 22, 2014, 08:11:53 PM
There's Amaral's Ace. When is he going to throw that one in?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on June 22, 2014, 08:15:33 PM
quote"Anyone can develop a theory and claim his theory is above all other theories"unquote
You mean like the McCanns? yes indeed! abduction has all the evidence you speak of.
Maddie didn't suffer any harm, thank god! well apart from the book thing, she will be raging when she finds out about that on her happy return from where ever it is she is being kept.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: VIXTE on June 22, 2014, 08:17:24 PM
A theory of putting a dead child in a coffin which is already in a church is a fantasy. If not a sign of a serious mental illness.
It's not a fantasy if there was a coffin inside the church and you had keys to get inside then there is opportunity to do it whether you think it's a fantasy or not.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: pegasus on June 22, 2014, 09:52:17 PM
It's not a fantasy if there was a coffin inside the church and you had keys to get inside then there is opportunity to do it whether you think it's a fantasy or not.
What were the results of your research into past cases of concealment in a third party box?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: pathfinder73 on June 22, 2014, 10:12:05 PM
A mortician from Florida murdered his wife, then he stuffed her corpse into a coffin of some old lady. The wife and the old laty got buried together.
Thanks Martina.
"Her body was stored in a cooler at Deltona Memorial Funeral Home for a few days. On Aug. 9 she was buried with 89-year-old Marjorie Hutchison in the same coffin.
Authorities reviewed funeral-home records and found a closed casket ceremony that had occurred about the time Exelee disappeared. Volusia County sheriff's investigators later exhumed the casket and discovered Exelee Villella's body in a white body bag beneath Hutchison."
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: pegasus on June 22, 2014, 10:42:56 PM
A mortician from Florida murdered his wife, then he stuffed her corpse into a coffin of some old lady. The wife and the old lady got buried together.
Well found Martina. However the perp was a mortician and had full access to and control over the coffin. For anyone but a mortician it would be much more difficult.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: VIXTE on June 23, 2014, 12:54:34 AM
It's not a fantasy if there was a coffin inside the church and you had keys to get inside then there is opportunity to do it whether you think it's a fantasy or not.
Are you saying that in Portugal access to a mortuary is accessible to any visitors?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: slartibartfast on June 23, 2014, 04:22:13 AM
Actually it was Mr Amaral who said that @)(++(* @)(++(* I wonder what his next brilliant idea would be @)(++(*
Why are you laughing about someone's death ?
Is this the mindset of the ardent mccanns supporter ?
Sympathy only for the mccanns, and nobody else ?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Eleanor on June 23, 2014, 09:06:08 AM
Is anyone actually supporting Amaral's latest barking theory? I would have thought that this would tell everyone anything they need to know about this man.
Or did The McCanns rush to this hidden freezer that no one has ever seen or found, grab Madeleine's body, and stuff it in a handy coffin that just happened to turn up at the church? All under the gaze of The PJ and the world's Media.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Victoria on June 23, 2014, 02:01:09 PM
Is anyone actually supporting Amaral's latest barking theory? I would have thought that this would tell everyone anything they need to know about this man.
Or did The McCanns rush to this hidden freezer that no one has ever seen or found, grab Madeleine's body, and stuff it in a handy coffin that just happened to turn up at the church? All under the gaze of The PJ and the world's Media.
Don't forget driving around with it in the boot at some point as well.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: pathfinder73 on June 23, 2014, 02:19:08 PM
That began at absolute earliest July 1/2, probably later, so the church June 2/3 idea doesn't fit with it
Moved a month later was said by a few people in this case if you pay attention. 2 JUNE is the perfect opportunity (ping discrepancies reinforce that view) before the European tour and in the first week they got the hire car. Why did they need the car that week? They were away for most of it? Visiting Pope etc.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: colombosstogey on June 23, 2014, 02:41:39 PM
And they therefore had the access to a dead body which was left in the middle of the church in a coffin?
The body was in the church overnight why wouldnt it be?
My MIL when she sadly died was kept over night in the church so people could pay their last respects to her as she was the first one in the morning for full service.
So its quite normal for this to happen. A lot of older churches are quite cool and it was early in the season. So the fact a dead body was laying in state in a coffin over night is nothing unusual.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Eleanor on June 23, 2014, 02:53:24 PM
The body was in the church overnight why wouldnt it be?
My MIL when she sadly died was kept over night in the church so people could pay their last respects to her as she was the first one in the morning for full service.
So its quite normal for this to happen. A lot of older churches are quite cool and it was early in the season. So the fact a dead body was laying in state in a coffin over night is nothing unusual.
In June? It's pretty hot on The Algarve in June. Not that I mind. But putting a defrosting body in the coffin doesn't sound like a very good idea. There might have been a puddle on the floor. Then what? OMG.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: pegasus on June 23, 2014, 03:00:53 PM
Moved a month later was said by a few people in this case if you pay attention. 2 JUNE is the perfect opportunity before the European tour and in the first week they got the hire car. Why did they need the car that week? They were away for most of it? Visiting Pope etc.
You might consider paying attention to this simple hypothetical test question for armchair detectives: Joe Bloggs is seen by a neighbour leaving the back door of his van open for several nights running starting on date Z. During the preceding five weeks the back door of the van had not been left open because certainly someone would have noticed if it had. Without needing to know the reason why it was open, the question is simply, on what date did that reason occur?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: VIXTE on June 23, 2014, 03:31:02 PM
You might consider paying attention to this simple hypothetical test question for armchair detectives: Joe Bloggs is seen by a neighbour leaving the back door of his van open for several nights running starting on date Z. During the preceding five weeks the back door of the van had not been left open because certainly someone would have noticed if it had. Without needing to know the reason why it was open, the question is simply, on what date did that reason occur?
This is a story line from film noir. Modern policing would include CCTV, phone and interned data and similar.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: pathfinder73 on June 23, 2014, 03:32:36 PM
You might consider paying attention to this simple hypothetical test question for armchair detectives: Joe Bloggs is seen by a neighbour leaving the back door of his van open for several nights running starting on date Z. During the preceding five weeks the back door of the van had not been left open because certainly someone would have noticed if it had. Without needing to know the reason why it was open, the question is simply, on what date did that reason occur?
They didn't move there until 2 july - the reason why it was left open. the neighbour saw that boot open every time she turned the car around so she reported it as being suspicious.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: VIXTE on June 23, 2014, 03:34:22 PM
The body was in the church overnight why wouldnt it be?
My MIL when she sadly died was kept over night in the church so people could pay their last respects to her as she was the first one in the morning for full service.
So its quite normal for this to happen. A lot of older churches are quite cool and it was early in the season. So the fact a dead body was laying in state in a coffin over night is nothing unusual.
Even if the body is in the church, it surely woudn't be left unattended and in the middle of the church hall so anyone can temper with it?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Eleanor on June 23, 2014, 03:35:36 PM
No inside parking. Cars can get like an oven, even at night.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: jassi on June 23, 2014, 03:37:53 PM
They didn't move there until 2 july - the reason why it was left open. the neighbour saw that boot open every time she turned the car around so she reported it as being suspicious.
Is this in the accessible files? If so, where? I haven't found any such statement.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: pathfinder73 on June 23, 2014, 05:18:39 PM
She reported it in July but it was it was never followed up at the time so it's not in the files.
"There is a witness, that was never heard, a jurist that lived next to the couple, in the second house [villa] outside of the apartment, saying that the car trunk was left open during the night, for airing."
TOTL This neighbour has signed a document authorising the broadcast of her deposition that identifies her, but fearing threats and pressures, she doesn't show her face.
40.30 – This is an interesting matter, when I left the Criminal Investigation Department in Portimão, in October 2007, nothing was known about this vehicle, about this issue of the open car boot. We knew that inside the vehicle cadaver odour and bodily fluids had been found, where Madeleine McCann's DNA profile was extracted from, with 15 alleles. Months later, there is a lawyer, who lives nearby, who came to report that after the McCanns arrived at this villa, they saw the car boot open from then on.
41.09 – Witness: "I drive down this street every day to turn my car around at that end, and every time that I passed the house, and I looked at the car, and the car always had an open boot door, day or night. I often passed at night, and always verified it. It was a fact, I reported it, and that was it."
See 4.00
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Eleanor on June 23, 2014, 05:48:32 PM
She reported it in July but it was it was never followed up at the time so it's not in the files.
"There is a witness, that was never heard, a jurist that lived next to the couple, in the second house [villa] outside of the apartment, saying that the car trunk was left open during the night, for airing."
TOTL This neighbour has signed a document authorising the broadcast of her deposition that identifies her, but fearing threats and pressures, she doesn't show her face.
40.30 – This is an interesting matter, when I left the Criminal Investigation Department in Portimão, in October 2007, nothing was known about this vehicle, about this issue of the open car boot. We knew that inside the vehicle cadaver odour and bodily fluids had been found, where Madeleine McCann's DNA profile was extracted from, with 15 alleles. Months later, there is a lawyer, who lives nearby, who came to report that after the McCanns arrived at this villa, they saw the car boot open from then on.
41.09 – Witness: "I drive down this street every day to turn my car around at that end, and every time that I passed the house, and I looked at the car, and the car always had an open boot door, day or night. I often passed at night, and always verified it. It was a fact, I reported it, and that was it."
And we are supposed to take this as gospel?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: pegasus on June 23, 2014, 06:08:15 PM
She reported it in July but it was it was never followed up at the time so it's not in the files...
Actually she reported it on some date well after her actual observations. I assume she reported it after Oct 2nd (or very shortly before Oct 2nd). But are the log of her contacting PJ and her identity even in the full files available to SY? That raises the possibility, that the SY team may not even know how to contact this witness for interview?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: VIXTE on June 23, 2014, 06:47:03 PM
A body would be in the church, not a church hall. The church would be locked and there only accessible to those with a key.
So how would someone even with the key know in some part of this church, obviously not in the church hall where they would pray there is a coffin with a body. They would need to go through the church premises to find it, we don't know if it was even locked in a special room for these purposes. I don't agree there are bodies hanging around churches just like that. There must be a special chapel for the bodies to be kept overnight.
Amaral did not say there was a body in the church, in a closed or locked coffin there is a possibility that someone with a key would possibly have an access to this coffin.. No. He said THEY used the coffin to place the child's body explicitly under the feet of the dead body. A proper policeman would never ever say this with a level of certainty if there is no firm evidence of this being truth. Have you ever hear any policeman in the world saying something like this? Even if there was an evidence a policeman would provide the evidence to the court, together with the possible theory. This is the difference between this fantasist and a proper policeman!
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: slartibartfast on June 23, 2014, 11:12:37 PM
So how would someone even with the key know in some part of this church, obviously not in the church hall where they would pray there is a coffin with a body. They would need to go through the church premises to find it, we don't know if it was even locked in a special room for these purposes. I don't agree there are bodies hanging around churches just like that. There must be a special chapel for the bodies to be kept overnight.
Never argue from a position if ignorance. Coffins are often taken into churches the previous day and positioned in front of the alter. They are then left until the service the following day (the church being locked up obviously).
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on June 23, 2014, 11:30:49 PM
You are absolutely correct Slab...
It is a custom in the UK. Some people prefer the coffin to be at home or in a funeral parlor before hand.
I believe that it is possible for bodies to be placed inside coffins-graves- but I don't think it happened in this case. The crematoria staff usually open the coffin and check all is ok. (but that depends on laws and customs of any given country).
I don't agree with that thesis.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Eleanor on June 24, 2014, 06:28:11 AM
You certainly wouldn't get away with it in France. There aren't many Crematoriums, so the coffin often has to cross a commune border. The coffin is checked before it leaves on it's final journey, and then again before it is cremated.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Victoria on June 24, 2014, 08:47:58 AM
You certainly wouldn't get away with it in France. There aren't many Crematoriums, so the coffin often has to cross a commune border. The coffin is checked before it leaves on it's final journey, and then again before it is cremated.
I don't believe for a moment that the coffin wouldn't be checked again in Portugal either. Which is just another reason Amaral is off his rocker.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Eleanor on June 24, 2014, 09:00:52 AM
I don't believe for a moment that the coffin wouldn't be checked again in Portugal either. Which is just another reason Amaral is off his rocker.
Well, they can't actually check, can they. Like most of Amaral's mad theories.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Brietta on June 24, 2014, 10:42:15 AM
I think that close inspection of Dr Amaral’s theories concerning what happened to Madeleine reveal that they have no substance because they are unworkable in practice. That should have been easily determined at the time just by a process of elimination.
The latest notion regarding a coffin is just the latest ill thought out fantasy which is presented without a shred of evidence to back it up. For example the owner of the coffin was not identified nor was a date given when this coffin invasion was perpetrated. It will however be added to the list of myths as have all the other thoughts which have emanated from the same source.
Dr Amaral’s theories as outlined in his book, have been tumbled like a house of cards as is proved by the re-opening of Madeleine’s case both in the UK and in Portugal following the same evidence but putting a different interpretation on it. If his theories had any substance one of two things would have happened following the case review; the Drs McCann and possibly their friends would have been arrested and charged; or there would not have been enough fresh evidence to justify re-opening Madeleine’s case.
The PJ and the Met are looking at abduction by a stranger.
The fact that Dr Amaral had to come up with a fresh allegation for what happened to Madeleine serves to show that not even he is not going with some of his original thesis. The fact that neither the PJ or the Met consider Madeleine’s parents to be persons of interest in her disappearance should also speak volumes to him.
I believe Dr Amaral's theories to be totally incredible.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Lace on June 24, 2014, 11:00:43 AM
Amaral's Hypothesis changes with the wind.
I remember Amaral watching a video of Gerry walking on the beach by the rocks.
Amaral says to ? [can't remember, perhaps someone can come up with the video] 'He's not looking for crabs that's for sure' to me meaning that he thought Gerry had hidden her on the beach.
It was proven that Gerry wouldn't have been able to throw Madeleine into the sea from the cliffs as it was said he wouldn't have been strong enough to hurl her far enough to reach the sea.
Also Gerry wouldn't have been able to dispose of Madeleine in the sea from the beach as it was low tide that night of the 3rd of May.
So where on earth could Gerry or Kate have hidden Madeleine, taking into account they were strangers to the area. The ground [as Amaral pointed out] was too hard to bury someone, the sea was low tide, couldn't from the rocks. Where???
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Eleanor on June 24, 2014, 11:23:16 AM
This why Amaral was so interested in Robert Murat. He jolly well knew that The McCanns could not have disposed of that child's body without local help. I believe that Amaral actually threaten Robert Murat, according to Robert Murat. But Robert Murat wasn't a local peasant, and well wise to what Amaral was up to.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: pegasus on June 24, 2014, 12:23:20 PM
In Portugal, in 2010, there were about 110 000 deaths, the national cremation rate was around six per cent, there were 14 crematoria in mainland Portugal. http://crematorium.eu/portugal-welcome.html
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: pathfinder73 on June 24, 2014, 12:42:19 PM
Well, they can't actually check, can they. Like most of Amaral's mad theories.
If it was underneath another person you may not see it even if the coffin was checked. They would not move and look underneath the body? If a body was hidden on the cliff face for a month then it would be badly decomposed by the time it was wrapped and took a 5 minute ride to the church.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: pegasus on June 24, 2014, 12:56:31 PM
If it was underneath another person you may not see it even if the coffin was checked. They would not move and look underneath the body? If a body was hidden on the cliff face for a month then it would be badly decomposed by the time it was wrapped and took a 5 minute ride to the church.
Easily disproven. Absence of airing in the following 4 weeks in an easily observable by many carpark. My great- grandfather used to call it the dog that didn't bark concept.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: pathfinder73 on June 24, 2014, 01:03:30 PM
Easily disproven. Absence of airing in the following 4 weeks in an easily observable by many carpark. My great- grandfather used to call it the dog that didn't bark concept.
You what? By many carpark? In English please. Do people take walks down steep cliff faces?
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: pegasus on June 24, 2014, 05:45:14 PM
You what? By many carpark? In English please. Do people take walks down steep cliff faces?
When you said "took a 5 minute ride" I assumed you meant in the car? And that you were taliking about the beginning of June? If so, why was there no airing of car observed during the next 4 weeks? The carpark were it was regularly parked throughout June was visible to many people.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: pathfinder73 on June 24, 2014, 07:04:13 PM
When you said "took a 5 minute ride" I assumed you meant in the car? And that you were taliking about the beginning of June? If so, why was there no airing of car observed during the next 4 weeks? The carpark were it was regularly parked throughout June was visible to many people.
Because they were at the OC not a private villa. Who in their right mind would leave a car boot open with all the press camped outside. Maybe they did wait until they got to the villa.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Eleanor on June 24, 2014, 07:07:00 PM
Because they were at the OC not a private villa. Who in their right mind would leave a car boot open with all the press camped outside. Maybe they did wait until they got to the villa.
And the whole family drove around in a stinky car. I bet.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: pathfinder73 on June 24, 2014, 07:15:29 PM
Because they were at the OC not a private villa. Who in their right mind would leave a car boot open with all the press camped outside. Maybe they did wait until they got to the villa.
If one day you transported something (let's say hypothetically for example some bags of gardening stuff) in a van and it made the van smelly, on which day would you start airing the van? Its elementary.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: pathfinder73 on June 26, 2014, 12:36:49 PM
If one day you transported something (let's say hypothetically for example some bags of gardening stuff) in a van and it made the van smelly, on which day would you start airing the van? Its elementary.
You think the dogs alerted to bags of gardening stuff 8-)(--) Elementary my ass. Only ONE witness saw it constantly open at private villa and there was cadaver scent in the car.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Eleanor on June 26, 2014, 12:40:31 PM
If one day you transported something (let's say hypothetically for example some bags of gardening stuff) in a van and it made the van smelly, on which day would you start airing the van? Its elementary.
I once broke an egg on the carpet in the back of my van. The smell was appalling. I didn't wait four weeks to clean it up and air the van.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Eleanor on June 26, 2014, 12:42:35 PM
You think the dogs alerted to bags of gardening stuff 8-)(--) Elementary my ass. Only ONE witness saw it constantly open at private villa and there was cadaver scent in the car.
You have absolutely no proof that it was Cadaver Odour. No wonder Amaral cocked up if he was reading the likes of this rubbish, and taking it as gospel.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: pathfinder73 on June 26, 2014, 01:09:06 PM
You have absolutely no proof that it was Cadaver Odour. No wonder Amaral cocked up if he was reading the likes of this rubbish, and taking it as gospel.
Dear oh dear. Eddie was chasing blood scent all over the car park. Keela gets in real close to alert to blood. We will see if it comes to trial.
Title: Re: Amaral's Hypothesis - credible or not?
Post by: Eleanor on June 26, 2014, 01:18:31 PM