UK Justice Forum 🇬🇧
Disappeared and Abducted Children and Young Adults => Madeleine McCann (3) disappeared from her parent's holiday apartment at Ocean Club, Praia da Luz, Portugal on 3 May 2007. No trace of her has ever been found. => Topic started by: Matthew Wyse on July 01, 2014, 03:05:04 PM
-
In her book called Madeleine, Kate McCann admits that the employing of private investigators to undertake investigations in Portugal was 'technically illegal'. Given this admission are the McCanns really so different from Goncalo Amaral?
From Madeleine.
"Our first investigators, the Spanish company Método 3, began working for us in October. With private investigations technically illegal in Portugal, we felt the closest we could get would be a firm from somewhere on the Iberian Peninsula, which would have the advantage of familiarity with local systems, culture and geography and the best network of contacts in the region."
510
-
Well, she has admitted they carried out criminal activities. 8(0(*
-
In her book called Madeleine, Kate McCann admits that the employing of private investigators to undertake investigations in Portugal was 'technically illegal'. Given this admission are the McCanns really so different from Goncalo Amaral?
Good to see you back Matt. You raise a very interesting point to which I agree. Knowingly getting involved in illegal activities in a foreign jurisdiction has no justification. There is no difference between illegal and technically illegal so the McCanns are bloody lucky not to have been arrested and charged with interference in a criminal investigation.
-
Well, she has admitted they carried out criminal activities. 8(0(*
And so are all of us on here. We are all investigating, in one direction or the other and to the best of our abilities, are we not?
-
For goodness sake sadie, after all you've said about Amaral.
Pot calling the kettle black or what ?
Amaral is a Criminal and a proven liar
-
Amaral is a Criminal and a proven liar
....and the mccanns have carried out criminal activities.
-
....and the mccanns have carried out criminal activities.
The only difference I can see is that Amaral was prosecuted and the McCanns haven't which sort of undermines the whole point of having laws at all in Portugal if they are going to pick and choose.
-
The only difference I can see is that Amaral was prosecuted and the McCanns haven't which sort of undermines the whole point of having laws at all in Portugal if they are going to pick and choose.
Indeed Angelo.
They should have been prosecuted with the full force of the law.
Question is, why weren't they ???
-
The only difference I can see is that Amaral was prosecuted and the McCanns haven't which sort of undermines the whole point of having laws at all in Portugal if they are going to pick and choose.
amaral was found guilty and was featured on the amnesty international website...mccanns ...nothing
do you know the precise details of the laws involved or are you just going on the gossip on the forums
-
Indeed Angelo.
They should have been prosecuted with the full force of the law.
Question is, why weren't they ???
There was always the sympathy vote but my own view is the law is the law. If you break the law you take the consequences regardless of the circumstances. Kate McCann's efforts to downplay their criminal activity by calling it technically illegal just doesn't wash as far as I am concerned. Those private investigators alienated witnesses and most probably prevented people coming forward by their boasts to the press. Not only was what they did illegal but they managed to employ crooks too in the form of Metodo3 and Halligen.
-
amaral was found guilty and was featured on the amnesty international website...mccanns ...nothing
do you know the precise details of the laws involved or are you just going on the gossip on the forums
...and that of course involved the convicted liar and murderer Cipriano.
-
There was always the sympathy vote but my own view is the law is the law. If you break the law you take the consequences regardless of the circumstances. Kate McCann's efforts to downplay their criminal activity by calling it technically illegal just doesn't wash as far as I am concerned. Those private investigators alienated witnesses and most probably prevented people coming forward by their boasts to the press.
Precisely.
It's no good the mccanns trying to have their cake and eat it.
-
amaral was found guilty and was featured on the amnesty international website...mccanns ...nothing
do you know the precise details of the laws involved or are you just going on the gossip on the forums
Maybe you should direct that question to Kate McCann.
-
Maybe you should direct that question to Kate McCann.
I don't think its clear the mccanns broke any laws
-
The mccanns broke the law.
It's quite clear cut.
-
The mccanns broke the law.
It's quite clear cut.
you have absolutely no evidence for that ...just forum gossip
-
you have absolutely no evidence for that ...just forum gossip
What a short memory you have, or is that comment of yours , just plain stupid ?
-
What a short memory you have, or is that comment of yours , just plain stupid ?
wheres the evidence
-
In her book called Madeleine, Kate McCann admits that the employing of private investigators to undertake investigations in Portugal was 'technically illegal'. Given that this renders the McCanns technically criminal by their own admission are they really so different from Amaral?
do you have the exact quote from the book
-
The mccanns broke the law.
It's quite clear cut.
so you just made this up..total BS from stephen as usual
-
From Madeleine.
"Our first investigators, the Spanish company Método 3, began working for us in October. With private investigations technicaly ilegal in Portugal, we felt the closest we could get would be a firm from somewhere on the Iberian Peninsula, which would have the advantage of familiarity with local systems, culture and geography and the best network of contacts in the region."
-
From Madeleine.
"Our first investigators, the Spanish company Método 3, began working for us in October. With private investigations technicaly ilegal in Portugal, we felt the closest we could get would be a firm from somewhere on the Iberian Peninsula, which would have the advantage of familiarity with local systems, culture and geography and the best network of contacts in the region."
Thanks...so just as I expected Kate did not admit to technically breaking the law...what a load of rubbish as usual
-
The only difference I can see is that Amaral was prosecuted and the McCanns haven't which sort of undermines the whole point of having laws at all in Portugal if they are going to pick and choose.
How does this sudden feeling that the Mccanns broke the Law with their searching / investigations fit in with all your going on that they should have given up their life in the UK and become roving searchers / investigators themselves. [Private Investigators themselves]
You avowed several time that YOU would have done just that. To have given up your life in the UK and have searched (= privately investigated) the length and breadth of PT until you found her ... or what had happened to her.
You would have NEVER given up, you avowed.
Some inconsistencies here, Angelo ? Really MAJOR ones
-
Thanks...so just as I expected Kate did not admit to technically breaking the law...what a load of rubbish as usual
Are you blind or just plain stupid ?
-
Thanks...so just as I expected Kate did not admit to technically breaking the law...what a load of rubbish as usual
Before you make a fool of yourself yet again davel who employed Metodo 3 to undertake illegal activities?
Who knew fool well that employing a firm of Spanish investigators to work on a criminal case in Portugal was illegal?
We all know the answer to the above but the question I would like answered is this. Who instructed Metodo 3 to arrange legal representation for Leonor Cipriano,the only purpose of such being to undermine Amaral?
-
Before you make a fool of yourself yet again davel who employed Metodo 3 to undertake illegal activities?
Who knew fool well that employing a firm of Spanish investigators to work on a criminal case in Portugal was illegal?
So private Investigations were illegal if The Mccanns did them, but if you personally did them (and John) then they were ok?
So you were prepared to break the Law?
Where is your consistency, Angelo?
-
Before you make a fool of yourself yet again davel who employed Metodo 3 to undertake illegal activities?
Who knew fool well that employing a firm of Spanish investigators to work on a criminal case in Portugal was illegal?
Its you making a fool of yourself.. the mccanns are guilty of nothing....what exactly was the nature of the contract between the mccanns and what investigations did metodo 3 carry out in Portugal..thats before I ask you the precise details of the portuguese law
-
So private Investigations were illegal if The Mccanns did them, but if you personally did them (and John) then they were ok?
So you were you prepared to break the Law?
Where is your consistency, Angelo?
Whether Angelo would gave chosen to break the law of not is not the issue, it is the fact that the McCanns assuredly did.
-
So private Investigations were illegal if The Mccanns did them, but if you personally did them (and John) then they were ok?
So you were you prepared to break the Law?
Where is your consistency, Angelo?
It is illegal to undertake private investigations in a criminal case while official investigations are ongoing. The McCanns knew this but went ahead anyway. What does that tell us about them?
-
Whether Angelo would gave chosen to break the law of not is not the issue, it is the fact that the McCanns assuredly did.
no they didn't..,..see my post above..
-
Its you making a fool of yourself.. the mccanns are guilty of nothing....what exactly was the nature of the contract between the mccanns and what investigations did metodo 3 carry out in Portugal..thats before I ask you the precise details of the portuguese law
What investigations did Metodo 3 carry out in Portugal?? Are you for real ??
When you employ someone to break the law davel you are every bit the criminal as are the persons you employ. The McCanns and Metodo 3 should have been prosecuted for what they did in direct violation of Portuguese Law. No doubt Amaral was considering this before he was removed.
-
What investigations did Metodo 3 carry out in Portugal?? Are you for real ??
no I asked that question...and what was the nature of the contract between met 3 and the mccanns..the mmccanns are guilty of nothing...
-
no I asked that question...and what was the nature of the contract between met 3 and the mccanns..the mmccanns are guilty of nothing...
The ignorance argument won't wash this time as Kate acknowledges in her book that they knew it was 'technically illegal'. She obviously thinks that being technically illegal is somehow a lesser crime.
-
It is illegal to undertake private investigations in a criminal case while official investigations are ongoing. The McCanns knew this but went ahead anyway. What does that tell us about them?
It tells us that they
a) didn't believe the PJ's investigation into their daughter's disappearance was making any progress at all and
b) they were desperate to find their child.
If these two facts mean that they are ripe for another kicking on this forum well then that's just par for the course. And I don't for one minute see how desperate parents who technically break the law (allegedly) to find a missing child is on the same level as covering up for colleagues who have tortured a suspect, nope not similar at all.
Remember the sanctimonious tripe from certain quarters that they would do whatever it takes to find their own child if she or he were missing - well would they have done whatever it takes, except break this particular aspect of PT law?
-
It tells us that they
a) didn't believe the PJ's investigation into their daughter's disappearance was making any progress at all and
b) they were desperate to find their child.
If these two facts mean that they are ripe for another kicking on this forum well then that's just par for the course. And I don't for one minute see how desperate parents who technically break the law (allegedly) to find a missing child is on the same level as covering up for colleagues who have tortured a suspect, nope not similar at all.
Remember the sanctimonious tripe from certain quarters that they would do whatever it takes to find their own child if she or he were missing - well would they have done whatever it takes, except break this particular aspect of PT law?
So they broke the Portuguese Law at least twice.
Nice.
-
It tells us that they
a) didn't believe the PJ's investigation into their daughter's disappearance was making any progress at all and
b) they were desperate to find their child.
If these two facts mean that they are ripe for another kicking on this forum well then that's just par for the course. And I don't for one minute see how desperate parents who technically break the law (allegedly) to find a missing child is on the same level as covering up for colleagues who have tortured a suspect, nope not similar at all.
Remember the sanctimonious tripe from certain quarters that they would do whatever it takes to find their own child if she or he were missing - well would they have done whatever it takes, except break this particular aspect of PT law?
And I would have also done as the McCanns did if my child was missing. I would also have committed a crime too.
-
And I would have also done as the McCanns did if my child was missing. I would also have committed a crime too.
Agreed.
There was no alternative.
-
Agreed.
There was no alternative.
Unless it was a mere diversion to cover the truth. 8**8:/:
-
So, let's see. The McCanns risked breaking Portuguese Law by hiring a team of detectives to investigate their child's disappearance as a diversion from the fact that it was them wot dunnit. And the logic behind this theory is...?
Well, it's what any criminal in that position would do isn't it? Rather than leave the country and let the heat die down, and out of reach from their justice system, instead they decide to break another law in this foreign country by getting in a team to investigate the crime which they themselves committed, paying this team hundreds of thousands of pounds from a fund which they illegally set up supposedly for self-enrichment.
Ah yes, it's all so plausible when put like that isn't it?
-
So, let's see. The McCanns risked breaking Portuguese Law by hiring a team of detectives to investigate their child's disappearance as a diversion from the fact that it was them wot dunnit. And the logic behind this theory is...?
Well, it's what any criminal in that position would do isn't it? Rather than leave the country and let the heat die down, and out of reach from their justice system, instead they decide to break another law in this foreign country by getting in a team to investigate the crime which they themselves committed, paying this team hundreds of thousands of pounds from a fund which they illegally set up supposedly for self-enrichment.
Ah yes, it's all so plausible when put like that isn't it?
Well they did break the law at least twice.
and of course if the abduction is made up as many believe, they've broke a whole lot more, including ones in the UK.
-
Before you make a fool of yourself yet again davel who employed Metodo 3 to undertake illegal activities?
Who knew fool well that employing a firm of Spanish investigators to work on a criminal case in Portugal was illegal?
We all know the answer to the above but the question I would like answered is this. Who instructed Metodo 3 to arrange legal representation for Leonor Cipriano,the only purpose of such being to undermine Amaral?
Do you have any supporting evidence for that from any credible source?
-
Do you have any supporting evidence for that from any credible source?
Are you kidding , or just trying to change history ?
-
From Madeleine.
"Our first investigators, the Spanish company Método 3, began working for us in October. With private investigations technicaly ilegal in Portugal, we felt the closest we could get would be a firm from somewhere on the Iberian Peninsula, which would have the advantage of familiarity with local systems, culture and geography and the best network of contacts in the region."
What investigations did Metodo 3 carry out in Portugal?? Are you for real ??
When you employ someone to break the law davel you are every bit the criminal as are the persons you employ. The McCanns and Metodo 3 should have been prosecuted for what they did in direct violation of Portuguese Law. No doubt Amaral was considering this before he was removed.
None it seems!
Metodo3
Since September 2007 , a private detection agency Metodo3 who are based in Barcelona, has been employed to complement the official investigation, in particular focusing its enquiries outside of Portugal. They were selected to help with the search for Madeleine on the basis of a proven history of resolving cases in the Iberian peninsula, and they can demonstrate strong working relationships with the relevant authorities in this region.
Metodo3 provide a multi lingual call handling centre for any information that might be related to Madeleine's abduction. All calls are dealt with in confidential manner.
The costs for Metodo 3's services will be met by contributions from the 'Find Madeleine' Fund and from a financial backer.
For further information on Metodo3 see www.metodo3.es
-
None it seems!
Metodo3
Since September 2007 , a private detection agency Metodo3 who are based in Barcelona, has been employed to complement the official investigation, in particular focusing its enquiries outside of Portugal. They were selected to help with the search for Madeleine on the basis of a proven history of resolving cases in the Iberian peninsula, and they can demonstrate strong working relationships with the relevant authorities in this region.
Metodo3 provide a multi lingual call handling centre for any information that might be related to Madeleine's abduction. All calls are dealt with in confidential manner.
The costs for Metodo 3's services will be met by contributions from the 'Find Madeleine' Fund and from a financial backer.
For further information on Metodo3 see www.metodo3.es
Would you care to remind us of how members of metodo3 gained criminal convictions ?
-
Would you care to remind us of how members of metodo3 gained criminal convictions ?
No replies yet?
It seems that many would prefer you to mention the McCanns` woeful parenting in order to pile in en masse for a few "stuck record" weak attempts at "witticisms."
-
The attempts to undermine Goncao Amaral and the Barragem do Arade reservoir searches aside, it is irrelevant whether investigations were being carried out in Portugal or elsewhere. The point being that a potential crime had been perpetrated in Portugal which was the subject of a criminal investigation. Under Portuguese Law any interference with that investigation including the employment of private investigators to carry out separate inquiries was illegal.
The McCanns had every opportunity to cooperate with the official investigation but failed miserably to do so. They had every opportunity to remain in Portugal and see every lead pursued and every possible reconstruction enacted but failed to do so. They did the opposite of what they boasted about in the beginning, instead of remaining in Portugal they flew home at the first opportunity abandoning the search to a bunch of crooks from Barcelona.
-
The attempts to undermine Goncao Amaral and the Barragem do Arade reservoir searches aside, it is irrelevant whether investigations were being carried out in Portugal or elsewhere. The point being that a potential crime had been perpetrated in Portugal which was the subject of a criminal investigation. Under Portuguese Law any interference with that investigation including the employment of private investigators to carry out separate inquiries was illegal.
The McCanns had every opportunity to cooperate with the official investigation but failed miserably to do so. They had every opportunity to remain in Portugal and see every lead pursued and every possible reconstruction enacted but failed to do so. They did the opposite of what they boasted about in the beginning, instead of remaining in Portugal they flew home at the first opportunity abandoning the search to a bunch of crooks from Barcelona.
You think they should have been living in Portugal for the last seven years, traveling the country and beyond following up leads themselves do you?
-
The attempts to undermine Goncao Amaral and the Barragem do Arade reservoir searches aside, it is irrelevant whether investigations were being carried out in Portugal or elsewhere. The point being that a potential crime had been perpetrated in Portugal which was the subject of a criminal investigation. Under Portuguese Law any interference with that investigation including the employment of private investigators to carry out separate inquiries was illegal.
The McCanns had every opportunity to cooperate with the official investigation but failed miserably to do so. They had every opportunity to remain in Portugal and see every lead pursued and every possible reconstruction enacted but failed to do so. They did the opposite of what they boasted about in the beginning, instead of remaining in Portugal they flew home at the first opportunity abandoning the search to a bunch of crooks from Barcelona.
Angelo...why have you removed two of my posts...censorship..
The fact is the mcccanns would have had a contract with M3...any contract invoving illegal activity is void...therefore the mccanns could NOT have had a contract requiring M3 to operate in Portugal..
-
You think they should have been living in Portugal for the last seven years, traveling the country and beyond following up leads themselves do you?
Maybe if they had cooperated with the police back in 2007 this case could have been resolved by now but as it stands they didn't and the rest is history.
Let's hope the persons of interest currently cooperating with the police show a little more interest in finding a little girl than her mother did by refusing to answer the simplest of questions.
-
Angelo...why have you removed two of my posts...censorship..
The fact is the mcccanns would have had a contract with M3...any contract invoving illegal activity is void...therefore the mccanns could NOT have had a contract requiring M3 to operate in Portugal..
Your posts were off topic and amounted to speculation. The McCanns knew that by engaging private investigators they were effectively putting two fingers up to the Portuguese. As far as I am concerned they deserve whatever they get.
-
Your posts were off topic and amounted to speculation. The McCanns knew that by engaging private investigators they were effectively putting two fingers up to the Portuguese. As far as I am concerned they deserve whatever they get.
Their only reason for employing PI/s was to find their daughter. How anyone can criticise that is a mystery to me.
-
Their only reason for employing PI/s was to find their daughter. How anyone can criticise that is a mystery to me.
Are you therefore saying it is acceptable yo break the law when it suits you ?
-
Are you therefore saying it is acceptable yo break the law when it suits you ?
Which law?
-
Maybe if they had cooperated with the police back in 2007 this case could have been resolved by now but as it stands they didn't and the rest is history.
Let's hope the persons of interest currently cooperating with the police show a little more interest in finding a little girl than her mother did by refusing to answer the simplest of questions.
round and round we go, making the same accusations. I could argue again (for the thousandth time that the McCanns DID co-operate up until the point where it became clear the PJ were only interested in resolving the case by prosecuting the McCanns for hiding their child's body) but what would be the point, really? You're never going to have it are you? You're always going to claim that if it were you in that position you would have fully co-operated with a police force whose only interest was throwing you in the slammer!
-
round and round we go, making the same accusations. I could argue again (for the thousandth time that the McCanns DID co-operate up until the point where it became clear the PJ were only interested in resolving the case by prosecuting the McCanns for hiding their child's body) but what would be the point, really? You're never going to have it are you? You're always going to claim that if it were you in that position you would have fully co-operated with a police force whose only interest was throwing you in the slammer!
Utter rubbish and more deflection.
There was no conspiracy to 'get' the mccanns.
They were suspects, as they would have been in this country.
The 'stitching up ' is a mccann supporter myth
-
Utter rubbish and more deflection.
There was no conspiracy to 'get' the mccanns.
They were suspects, as they would have been in this country.
The 'stitching up ' is a mccann supporter myth
They may well have been arrested, but given the intense media presence and interest, no way would they have been 'stitched up' .
-
They may well have been arrested, but given the intense media presence and interest, no way would they have been 'stitched up' .
Who are you quoting when you use the words "stitched up?"
-
They may well have been arrested, but given the intense media presence and interest, no way would they have been 'stitched up' .
That has always been a frequent phrase used by mccann supporters, no matter how some may deny it.
-
round and round we go, making the same accusations. I could argue again (for the thousandth time that the McCanns DID co-operate up until the point where it became clear the PJ were only interested in resolving the case by prosecuting the McCanns for hiding their child's body) but what would be the point, really? You're never going to have it are you? You're always going to claim that if it were you in that position you would have fully co-operated with a police force whose only interest was throwing you in the slammer!
[/b]
That is the 'thinking' which I find totally inexplicable.
You know that the Police have decided you are guilty.
So you ignore your lawyer and do everything you can to aid and abet your own arrest - even though you know that you are innocent and that the real perpetrator is still free.
What sane person would do that? It makes no sense.
-
Which law?
In this country they call it 'attempting to pervert the course of justice', don't know the Portuguese equivalent but I am sure Montclair or Luz will help you out.
-
[/b]
That is the 'thinking' which I find totally inexplicable.
You know that the Police have decided you are guilty.
So you ignore your lawyer and do everything you can to aid and abet your own arrest - even though you know that you are innocent and that the real perpetrator is still free.
What sane person would do that? It makes no sense.
It doesn't make sense, but that doesn't matter to those whose favourite pastime is judging the McCanns and finding them wanting in every aspect.
-
round and round we go, making the same accusations. I could argue again (for the thousandth time that the McCanns DID co-operate up until the point where it became clear the PJ were only interested in resolving the case by prosecuting the McCanns for hiding their child's body) but what would be the point, really? You're never going to have it are you? You're always going to claim that if it were you in that position you would have fully co-operated with a police force whose only interest was throwing you in the slammer!
You post some crap these days Alfred. It is a detectives job to explore all options but the McCanns thought they were above all that and decided to take the anti option. No cooperation... ...hire their own people ...do their own thing.
Let's face it, even the gullible British public can see that now!!
-
You post some crap these days Alfred. It is a detectives job to explore all options but the McCanns thought they were above all that and decided to take the anti option. No cooperation...
Thanks for your critique of my posts, always nice to have a moderator insult one's posts.
The detectives may well have explored all options but by the time they had made the McCanns arguidos they had discarded all options but one. Now, of course we know you would have been fully co-operative in such a situation, which may have resulted in you being put on remand for a year or two, pending a court case which may have dragged on for another year or two, only for your innocence to have been "finally proved". Weirdly the McCanns chose not to go down that route and decided to channel their resources into pursuing their child's abductor and to hell with the law that stood between them and taking such action. Weirdly too, I beleive they made the right choice. Apologies in advance for posting "some crap" again, but that happens to be my view.
-
Thanks for your critique of my posts, always nice to have a moderator insult one's posts.
The detectives may well have explored all options but by the time they had made the McCanns arguidos they had discarded all options but one. Now, of course we know you would have been fully co-operative in such a situation, which may have resulted in you being put on remand for a year or two, pending a court case which may have dragged on for another year or two, only for your innocence to have been "finally proved". Weirdly the McCanns chose not to go down that route and decided to channel their resources into pursuing their child's abductor and to hell with the law that stood between them and taking such action. Weirdly too, I beleive they made the right choice. Apologies in advance for posting "some crap" again, but that happens to be my view.
Believe it or not they made the WRONG choice. Seven years on Madeleine is still lost regardless of what you perceive to be the right choice.
One man's crap is another mans fantasy.
-
You post some crap these days Alfred. It is a detectives job to explore all options but the McCanns thought they were above all that and decided to take the anti option. No cooperation...
Let's face it, even the gullible British public can see that now!!
Apart from Kate taking her lawyer's advice and not answering questions on one occasion - what other instances are there when they refused to co-operate? You make it sound as if this was something which happened from day one.
IIRC Kate was at the police station for around 11 hrs the day before - being interrogated by th PJ. Can you explain why anyone would perceive that to be a clear case of her 'not co-operating' IYO?
-
Believe it or not they made the WRONG choice. Seven years on Madeleine is still lost regardless of what you perceive to be the right choice.
One man's crap is another mans fantasy.
So your opinion is right and mine wrong is it? Maybe, but only in your opinion!
Can you please tell me how the Portuguese police would have found Madeleine if Kate HAD answered questions like "Did you manage to sleep?" and "Is it true you called Sky News?" or if the McCanns and their friends had taken part in a reconstruction?
-
In this country they call it 'attempting to pervert the course of justice', don't know the Portuguese equivalent but I am sure Montclair or Luz will help you out.
I have no problem that 'attempting to pervert the course of justice' would be an offence. What did the PIs actually do that would have constituted such an offence?
-
It is illegal to undertake private investigations in a criminal case while official investigations are ongoing. The McCanns knew this but went ahead anyway. What does that tell us about them?
It tells us that they were desperate to find Madeleine. They knew that no one was searching for her any more. She was being ignored. Left to what ever fate beheld her.
YOU have already made it plain that you would have done YOUR OWN search
And you have vociferously criticized The Mccanns for not giving up their life in the UK to tramp around PT searching.
Let's have some consistency Angelo.... instead of the constant criticism of everything the Mccanns did and do.
What you are doing is duplicitous.
-
[/b]
That is the 'thinking' which I find totally inexplicable.
You know that the Police have decided you are guilty.
So you ignore your lawyer and do everything you can to aid and abet your own arrest - even though you know that you are innocent and that the real perpetrator is still free.
What sane person would do that? It makes no sense.
It would have brought an incredible amount of publicity to the case and hence aided the search for Madeleine....
-
It would have brought an incredible amount of publicity to the case and hence aided the search for Madeleine....
What would have brought an incredible amount of publicity to the case that the McCanns didn't do but should have?
-
What would have brought an incredible amount of publicity to the case that the McCanns didn't do but should have?
Read the thread.
-
Read the thread.
could be difficult as three days of posts have been deleted
-
could be difficult as three days of posts have been deleted
Reassigned, not deleted. Off topic posts... 8(0(*
-
Read the thread.
I've read it and the answer is not clear, so to save further ado why not just tell us?
-
In her book called Madeleine, Kate McCann admits that the employing of private investigators to undertake investigations in Portugal was 'technically illegal'. Given that this renders the McCanns technically criminal by their own admission are they really so different from Amaral?
From Madeleine.
"Our first investigators, the Spanish company Método 3, began working for us in October. With private investigations technicaly ilegal in Portugal, we felt the closest we could get would be a firm from somewhere on the Iberian Peninsula, which would have the advantage of familiarity with local systems, culture and geography and the best network of contacts in the region."
Technically illegal? You couldn't make it up if you tried. @)(++(*
-
Technically illegal? You couldn't make it up if you tried. @)(++(*
It wasn't technically illegal.
It was a criminal offense.
-
It wasn't technically illegal.
It was a criminal offence.
People usually use this term when they know that they have done wrong but use it in an attempt to portray the event in a different light, a case of getting ahead of the herd.
-
People usually use this term when they know that they have done wrong but use it in an attempt to portray the event in a different light, a case of getting ahead of the herd.
You mean in the same manner that little white lies told for the best of reasons aren't really lies at all? @)(++(*
Didn't Gonçalo Amaral get a suspended sentence for his little white lies and technically illegal activities?
-
I would like to know more about this law that deems private investigations to be illegal in Portugal. Is it in force for all time, or only during the course of a Police Investigation? What is it's purpose? And why would The PJ want to prevent relatives from looking for their own missing people?
How can The PJ prevent Internet Sleuths from following their own inquiries? And what would be the penalties if they could? How would those supposed penalties be enforced?
Did Metodo3 operate in Portugal itself or only in North Africa, Spain, and other European Countries? Not to forget America, of course. Although I'm not sure if they did that.
Did Officially Employed Agents of Metodo3 actually set foot in Portugal?
-
I would like to know more about this law that deems private investigations to be illegal in Portugal. Is it in force for all time, or only during the course of a Police Investigation? What is it's purpose? And why would The PJ want to prevent relatives from looking for their own missing people?
How can The PJ prevent Internet Sleuths from following their own inquiries? And what would be the penalties if they could? How would those supposed penalties be enforced?
Did Metodo3 operate in Portugal itself or only in North Africa, Spain, and other European Countries? Not to forget America, of course. Although I'm not sure if they did that.
Did Officially Employed Agents of Metodo3 actually set foot in Portugal?
The crux of it appears to be that interference in a live criminal investigation which includes the use of private investigators is deemed illegal activity in Portugal.
-
The crux of it appears to be that interference in a live criminal investigation which includes the use of private investigators is deemed illegal activity in Portugal.
what some of us would like to know is where this information comes from...is there a reliable independent source that explains the law ..what are the precise limitations....
-
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1564121/Madeleine-McCann-police-fury-over-private-hunt.html
This may answer some questions and pose a few more!
-
To clarify, commissioning a private investigation into criminal activities in Portugal whilst an official investigation is live constitutes an act of obstruction punishable under the Portuguese penal code.
Antonio Martins, president of the National Association of Portuguese Judges, told the newspaper 24 Horas: "It is still up to the state to carry out criminal investigation. That kind of activity has no legal standing.
"Anything that results from private investigation has no substance."
Mr Martins said the private detectives and even the McCanns themselves could be accused of "obstruction of justice".
Carlos Anjos, the head of Portugal's criminal police federation, added: "This can only be another diversion tactic from the McCanns. It is nothing but folklore.
"Portugal does not have legislation in this area. Private detectives who intervene in criminal cases cannot exist.
"The law only tolerates private detectives who gather information and only about matters of the private lives of certain people like extramarital relationships."
A separate police source warned that the involvement of investigators may not only be illegal but could have a detrimental effect on the inquiry.
The high ranking official told newspaper Correio da Manha: "If private investigators come here they will be running a serious risk of being arrested."
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1564121/Madeleine-McCann-police-fury-over-private-hunt.html
-
To clarify, commissioning a private investigation into criminal activities in Portugal whilst an official investigation is live constitutes an act of obstruction punishable under the Portuguese penal code.
Antonio Martins, president of the National Association of Portuguese Judges, told the newspaper 24 Horas: "It is still up to the state to carry out criminal investigation. That kind of activity has no legal standing.
"Anything that results from private investigation has no substance."
Mr Martins said the private detectives and even the McCanns themselves could be accused of "obstruction of justice".
Carlos Anjos, the head of Portugal's criminal police federation, added: "This can only be another diversion tactic from the McCanns. It is nothing but folklore.
"Portugal does not have legislation in this area. Private detectives who intervene in criminal cases cannot exist.
"The law only tolerates private detectives who gather information and only about matters of the private lives of certain people like extramarital relationships."
A separate police source warned that the involvement of investigators may not only be illegal but could have a detrimental effect on the inquiry.
The high ranking official told newspaper Correio da Manha: "If private investigators come here they will be running a serious risk of being arrested."
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1564121/Madeleine-McCann-police-fury-over-private-hunt.html
so the best confirmation we have is an un named police source in a newspaper article saying a private investigation MAY be illegal
-
One finds it hard to believe that any police force in the world would be too happy about "amateurs" carrying out a parallel investigations with an official current criminal investigation. One would also expect that most countries legal systems would have a mechanism to stop it under "obstructing or interfering with the course of justice".
It does rather seem self evident.
-
One finds it hard to believe that any police force in the world would be too happy about "amateurs" carrying out a parallel investigations with an official current criminal investigation. One would also expect that most countries legal systems would have a mechanism to stop it under "obstructing or interfering with the course of justice".
It does rather seem self evident.
I don't see how there can be a blanket law against a private investigation, as opposed to laws against using illicit means to gather information or actively interfering with or obstructing the course of justice. Otherwise, all the good people who had tried to help in the search would all be in the same category, I would have thought.
-
One finds it hard to believe that any police force in the world would be too happy about "amateurs" carrying out a parallel investigations with an official current criminal investigation. One would also expect that most countries legal systems would have a mechanism to stop it under "obstructing or interfering with the course of justice".
It does rather seem self evident.
It seems rather self evident to me that it is highly unusual for the victims of crime to feel the need to outsource in a criminal investigation.
However we know from Dr Amaral’s own statements that the criminal investigation was focused not on finding Madeleine … but on her parents 'guilt' in her disappearance.
The Drs McCann were seeing this at first hand and their focus was on finding their daughter.
No one else was looking for her.
-
It seems rather self evident to me that it is highly unusual for the victims of crime to feel the need to outsource in a criminal investigation.
However we know from Dr Amaral’s own statements that the criminal investigation was focused not on finding Madeleine … but on her parents 'guilt' in her disappearance.
The Drs McCann were seeing this at first hand and their focus was on finding their daughter.
No one else was looking for her.
You can't pick and choose when it is acceptable to break the law and whether the McCanns felt justified in employing their own investigators is beside the point. It is illegal to carry out a private investigation in Portugal when there is an official one in progress and the McCann were lucky not to have been charged as a result.
-
You can't pick and choose when it is acceptable to break the law and whether the McCanns felt justified in employing their own investigators is beside the point. It is illegal to carry out a private investigation in Portugal when there is an official one in progress and the McCann were lucky not to have been charged as a result.
I doubt luck comes into it.
If there had been the slightest chance of charging the Drs McCann with anything, I can't see the opportunity of it being passed over. So there must have been good reason they were not charged ... wonder what that could have been?
-
I doubt luck comes into it.
If there had been the slightest chance of charging the Drs McCann with anything, I can't see the opportunity of it being passed over. So there must have been good reason they were not charged ... wonder what that could have been?
Could it have been because they had hightailed it back to the protective shores of dear old Blighty ?
-
Could it have been because they had hightailed it back to the protective shores of dear old Blighty ?
Nope.
They were arguidos.
If they had been invited to return to Portugal they would have been compelled ... if not voluntarily then under arrest ... to comply with the request.
Must have been something else.
-
Nope.
They were arguidos.
If they had been invited to return to Portugal they would have been compelled ... if not voluntarily then under arrest ... to comply with the request.
Must have been something else.
They had Michael Caplan in place to fight any extradition. Perhaps seeing that the Portuguese judiciary just didn't think it was worth the expense to bring them back to Portugal ?
-
[ quote removed ]
For the record, Caplan, the 'lawyer' who represented the murderer Pinochet and stopped him being extradited to Spain.
Nice man. 8)-)))
-
Scotland Yard seemed mightily interested in the information gathered by Metodo3.
-
Scotland Yard seemed mightily interested in the information gathered by Metodo3.
Ah yes, the firm that promised to have Madeleine home by Christmas.
Who have been prosecuted for Industrial Espionage, and had no expertise in 'child abductions'.
-
Ah yes, the firm that promised to have Madeleine home by Christmas.
Who have been prosecuted for Industrial Espionage, and had no expertise in 'child abductions'.
No, Stephen. They said they "hoped" to have Madeleine home by Christmas
I don't know about the industrial espionage. And as far as I know there is no one with expertise in Child Abduction.
-
No, Stephen. They said they "hoped" to have Madeleine home by Christmas
I don't know about the industrial espionage. And as far as I know there is no one with expertise in Child Abduction.
I stand corrected on the ''hoped''.
As to the companies criminal record, well known.
Why did they employ this company ?
Had Metodo3 found any missing children ?
-
For the record, Caplan, the 'lawyer' who represented the murderer Pinochet and stopped him being extradited to Spain.
Nice man. 8)-)))
Why use quotation marks around lawyer? Michael Caplan is without doubt a lawyer.
Do you have a problem with individuals being legally represented?
-
I stand corrected on the ''hoped''.
As to the companies criminal record, well known.
Why did they employ this company ?
Had Metodo3 found any missing children ?
Do you know of any company, anywhere, that specialises in looking for Abducted Children?
I imagine that The McCanns employed this company because they were close by in Spain.
-
I stand corrected on the ''hoped''.
As to the companies criminal record, well known.
Why did they employ this company ?
Had Metodo3 found any missing children ?
has amaral found any missing children..has any detective agency found a child abducted by a stranger...the answer is no
-
Why use quotation marks around lawyer? Michael Caplan is without doubt a lawyer.
Do you have a problem with individuals being legally represented?
Why not.
Why not, the 'lawyer' who defended the mass murderer Pinochet.
Are you in the profession John-Pierre by some chance ? 8)-)))
-
Why use quotation marks around lawyer? Michael Caplan is without doubt a lawyer.
Do you have a problem with individuals being legally represented?
As a comment, people with strong cases don't generally feel the need to get the best legal support money can buy.
-
Do you know of any company, anywhere, that specialises in looking for Abducted Children?
I imagine that The McCanns employed this company because they were close by in Spain.
Well if you do a google search there are companies who do. 8((()*/
-
As a comment, people with strong cases don't generally feel the need to get the best legal support money can buy.
Rubbish. If I was accused of anything I would get the best representation available - regardless of the strength of my case.
-
Rubbish. If I was accused of anything I would get the best representation available - regardless of the strength of my case.
The best representation you could afford.
-
I don't see how there can be a blanket law against a private investigation, as opposed to laws against using illicit means to gather information or actively interfering with or obstructing the course of justice. Otherwise, all the good people who had tried to help in the search would all be in the same category, I would have thought.
Only if they were inhibiting a police investigation.
Ask yourself the question, forgetting about the McCanns.
"Do I believe that "civilians" who are wealthy should be allowed to hire other "civilians" to run an investigation where potentially they will with no authority question police witnesses"?. Especially as the "civilians" carrying out the investigation have no official powers and hold allegiance only to their paymasters.
That has the potential to be a gross interference in the course of justice. However if you believe that is desirable as the status quo that is up to you.
-
Only if they were inhibiting a police investigation.
Ask yourself the question, forgetting about the McCanns.
"Do I believe that "civilians" who are wealthy should be allowed to hire other "civilians" to run an investigation where potentially they will with no authority question police witnesses"?. Especially as the "civilians" carrying out the investigation have no official powers and hold allegiance only to their paymasters.
That has the potential to be a gross interference in the course of justice. However if you believe that is desirable as the status quo that is up to you.
Excellent question Alice.
-
Only if they were inhibiting a police investigation.
Ask yourself the question, forgetting about the McCanns.
"Do I believe that "civilians" who are wealthy should be allowed to hire other "civilians" to run an investigation where potentially they will with no authority question police witnesses"?. Especially as the "civilians" carrying out the investigation have no official powers and hold allegiance only to their paymasters.
That has the potential to be a gross interference in the course of justice. However if you believe that is desirable as the status quo that is up to you.
Many people tried to respond in the midst of a community drama in which the police were clearly overwhelmed. If the police had had more resources, had been better organised and coordinated, the civilian response might have been better channelled.
-
Many people tried to respond in the midst of a community drama in which the police were clearly overwhelmed. If the police had had more resources, had been better organised and coordinated, the civilian response might have been better channelled.
Did Mrs Murat 'interfere' in the official police investigation when she set up a stall to take statements from people who might have felt 'uncomfortable' talking to the police?
-
Did Mrs Murat 'interfere' in the official police investigation when she set up a stall to take statements from people who might have felt 'uncomfortable' talking to the police?
I was about to ask the same question. Jenny Murat (bless) ran a stand to encourage people to come forward who may not have wanted to speak directly to the police (or may not have had the time to, if they were on their way elsewhere).
It was a community emergency and a mad panic to try to help find her.
Would I have done the same, if I'd thought of it? Yes, no doubt, unless there were clear instructions from a competent and organised force to brief people as to what else they could do to help.
-
So the consensus of this forum is that individuals should have the freedom to decide which laws they will follow depending upon circumstances?
Interesting.
-
So the consensus of this forum is that individuals should have the freedom to decide which laws they will follow depending upon circumstances?
Interesting.
No. But no one has yet quoted a relevant law...
-
Only if they were inhibiting a police investigation.
Ask yourself the question, forgetting about the McCanns.
"Do I believe that "civilians" who are wealthy should be allowed to hire other "civilians" to run an investigation where potentially they will with no authority question police witnesses"?. Especially as the "civilians" carrying out the investigation have no official powers and hold allegiance only to their paymasters.
That has the potential to be a gross interference in the course of justice. However if you believe that is desirable as the status quo that is up to you.
I think its perfectly acceptable to hire extra help...just as people pay extra for health care...education...when they are not happy with what is provided by the state...that is a freedom that should be respected in a democracy
-
No. But no one has yet quoted a relevant law...
The authorities didn't appear worried about Mrs Murat's intervention ...
There are Portuguese private investigators who advertise their services ...
I would imagine that as long as they operated within common law, and did not interfere with witnesses, suspects or the official case ... their circumstances would be similar to anywhere else in the free world.
Seems to be the case as no one has yet given a citation which proves otherwise.
-
Don't forget that in Portugal one can be charged with criminal libel for criticising certain public figures, including judges, politicians, doctors, lawyers, civil servants etc. And this includes bringing complaints to their professional body.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/portugal/8275939/British-woman-may-face-trial-over-allegation-she-defamed-lawyer.html
A hangover from the bad old days.
The EU had to provide special measures to give immunity to MEPs, as otherwise they could technically have been prosecuted for arguing with Portuguese members or MPs.
-
Excellent question Alice.
The responses are even more revealing Faithlilly.
-
So the consensus of this forum is that individuals should have the freedom to decide which laws they will follow depending upon circumstances?
Interesting.
How did you arrive at this conclusion?
-
I think its perfectly acceptable to hire extra help...just as people pay extra for health care...education...when they are not happy with what is provided by the state...that is a freedom that should be respected in a democracy
In order that there can be absolutely no misunderstanding what you are suggesting, are you advocating that if any individual, provided he is rich enough, and believes the police are not up to the job, should be free to hire unauthorised civilians to do the job for him?
That sir is more or less condoning vigil[ censored word]m. Do you actually believe that should be permissible within any society? Or is the view just expedient for you in the terms of the current debate?
-
How did you arrive at this conclusion?
Read the thread sir. I asked a specific question that has been evaded.
-
In order that there can be absolutely no misunderstanding what you are suggesting, are you advocating that if any individual, provided he is rich enough, and believes the police are not up to the job, should be free to hire unauthorised civilians to do the job for him?
That sir is more or less condoning vigil[ censored word]m. Do you actually believe that should be permissible within any society? Or is the view just expedient for you in the terms of the current debate?
As long as those people act within the law there is absolutely nothing wrong with helping the police...you are totally wrong re the vigilante scenario...vigilantes punish...the police regularly rely on help searching from ordinary individuals...your criticism is just another thinly veiled attack on the mccanns
-
The authorities didn't appear worried about Mrs Murat's intervention ...
There are Portuguese private investigators who advertise their services ...
I would imagine that as long as they operated within common law, and did not interfere with witnesses, suspects or the official case ... their circumstances would be similar to anywhere else in the free world.
Seems to be the case as no one has yet given a citation which proves otherwise.
As in..
PRIVATE detectives hunting for Madeleine McCann are to quiz an Irish family who may have been the last to see her alive. Martin Smith, his wife and children told cops they saw a man carrying a little blonde girl in Praia da Luz on the night Maddie vanished. Investigators from the Metodo 3 agency hired by Maddie's parents Gerry and Kate are preparing to travel to Ireland to interview them. The family, from Drogheda, Co Louth, believe they saw the man taking the sleeping tot down to the beach at the Portuguese resort.
-
As in..
nothing wrong with that as they were no longer of interest to the active investigation...wahts the problem with pulling out all the stops to find out what happened to Maddie....people undergoing medical treatment often look at alternative therapies...no one complains
-
Read the thread sir. I asked a specific question that has been evaded.
What, like you've just evaded mine?
-
As in..
So, was PIs interviewing the Smiths in Ireland technically breaking Portuguese law?
-
So, was PIs interviewing the Smiths in Ireland technically breaking Portuguese law?
Looks like it.
-
Looks like it.
I thought the law (whichever law this is, which has yet to be ascertained) only covered interfering with an investigation on Portuguese soil...?
-
As long as those people act within the law there is absolutely nothing wrong with helping the police...you are totally wrong re the vigilante scenario...vigilantes punish...the police regularly rely on help searching from ordinary individuals...your criticism is just another thinly veiled attack on the mccanns
I have made no criticism of the McCanns neither overtly nor covertly nor indeed sir any criticism of anyone on this forum.
I have asked some questions made some statements and have asked posters generally for their opinions. It is the opinions of the posters I am interested in.
What I perceived the thread to be addressing was not helping the police at their request or offering help to the police but hiring people to do the polices work for them without reference to the police. Now would you like our justice system to follow that model?
It really is quite a simple question and can be answered without spurious reference to the McCanns.
You seem to believe sir that anyone who asks a valid question is somehow opposed to the McCanns. That would seem to be a curious stance to take.
-
What, like you've just evaded mine?
Well sir if that is how you choose to construe it.
I thought I had been plain.
No matter, I apologise and withdraw from the conversation.
-
I have made no criticism of the McCanns neither overtly nor covertly nor indeed sir any criticism of anyone on this forum.
I have asked some questions made some statements and have asked posters generally for their opinions. It is the opinions of the posters I am interested in.
What I perceived the thread to be addressing was not helping the police at their request or offering help to the police but hiring people to do the polices work for them without reference to the police. Now would you like our justice system to follow that model?
It really is quite a simple question and can be answered without spurious reference to the McCanns.
You seem to believe sir that anyone who asks a valid question is somehow opposed to the McCanns. That would seem to be a curious stance to take.
My opinion is that this thread and your support of the perceived Portuguese law re PI's in Portugal is a thinly veiled attack on the mccanns.There are countless private security firms in the uk doing police style work..the police could not function without help from the unqualified public..I don't see any point in your objection
-
Not really the same at all, the P.I.s were looking for evidence about Madeleine's disappearance, had they found a good lead, it would have become inadmissible as it had been obtained illegally as far at Portuguese law is concerned.
rubbish.you don't even know exactly what Portuguese law is
-
In order that there can be absolutely no misunderstanding what you are suggesting, are you advocating that if any individual, provided he is rich enough, and believes the police are not up to the job, should be free to hire unauthorised civilians to do the job for him?
That sir is more or less condoning vigil[ censored word]m. Do you actually believe that should be permissible within any society? Or is the view just expedient for you in the terms of the current debate?
..and here is an example of what happens when people take the law into their own hands, and think they are above it.
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/nov/28/vigilante-lee-james-life-murdering-bijan-ebrahimi
.......and what would have happened in this case, if the people working for the mccanns had targeted somebody as an abductor,. who was perfectly innocent, and good law abiding people had taken the law into their own hands ?
-
My opinion is that this thread and your support of the perceived Portuguese law re PI's in Portugal is a thinly veiled attack on the mccanns.There are countless private security firms in the uk doing police style work..the police could not function without help from the unqualified public..I don't see any point in your objection
From what has been posted, the Portuguese don't have the concept of criminal P.I.s. It may have escaped your notice, Portugal is another country with different laws.
-
..and here is an example of what happens when people take the law into their own hands, and think they are above it.
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/nov/28/vigilante-lee-james-life-murdering-bijan-ebrahimi
.......and what would have happened in this case, if the people working for the mccanns had targeted somebody as an abductor,. who was perfectly innocent, and good law abiding people had taken the law into their own hands ?
once again you don't understand what is going on..we are talking about investigating..not acting as judge and jury
-
Not really the same at all, the P.I.s were looking for evidence about Madeleine's disappearance, had they found a good lead, it would have become inadmissible as it had been obtained illegally as far at Portuguese law is concerned.
It would be good if we could get to the bottom of what this law actually states wouldn't it? For example, if someone had spotted Madeleine walking with a strange man down a street in Amsterdam and followed them to a specific location, where they then challenged the man, who then ran off, would that be illegal interference and therefore inadmissible?
-
From what has been posted, the Portuguese don't have the concept of criminal P.I.s. It may have escaped your notice, Portugal is another country with different laws.
and you do not know what those laws are...but base your ignorant opinions on what has been posted
-
It is quite staggering that some people don't realize when some people 'investigate', names invariably get released ,and, especially as in the case I highlighted things can rapidly get out of hand.
Now let's remind ourselves of which people pointed the finger at Murat. 8**8:/:
-
hasn't anyone noticed how much investigation is going on ...on this and other forums ...with posters reaching judgement and looking for the mccanns to be punished
-
and you do not know what those laws are...but base your ignorant opinions on what has been posted
I was referring to...
Carlos Anjos, the head of Portugal's criminal police federation, added:
Snip
"Portugal does not have legislation in this area. Private detectives who intervene in criminal cases cannot exist.
"The law only tolerates private detectives who gather information and only about matters of the private lives of certain people like extramarital relationships."
-
My opinion is that this thread and your support of the perceived Portuguese law re PI's in Portugal is a thinly veiled attack on the mccanns.There are countless private security firms in the uk doing police style work..the police could not function without help from the unqualified public..I don't see any point in your objection
Merciful heavens sir I expect you do but do not wish to acknowledge it.
You are entitled to your opinion of course, wrong thought it may be in this instance.
Perhaps we should politely beg to differ and close the conversation.
-
I was referring to...
Carlos Anjos, the head of Portugal's criminal police federation, added:
Snip
"Portugal does not have legislation in this area. Private detectives who intervene in criminal cases cannot exist.
"The law only tolerates private detectives who gather information and only about matters of the private lives of certain people like extramarital relationships."
so still no details on the wording of the law..it sounds as though criminal PI's do not exist in Portugal..thats about it
-
I was referring to...
Carlos Anjos, the head of Portugal's criminal police federation, added:
Snip
"Portugal does not have legislation in this area. Private detectives who intervene in criminal cases cannot exist.
"The law only tolerates private detectives who gather information and only about matters of the private lives of certain people like extramarital relationships."
So, there is no blanket legislation?
-
So, there is no blanket legislation?
Criminal PIs are not licensed/allowed in Portugal.
-
Criminal PIs are not licensed/allowed in Portugal.
But what of the PT law that doesn't allow PIs to operate in Ireland?
-
Criminal PIs are not licensed/allowed in Portugal.
PT has laws for absolutely everything under the sun. I did skim read and I haven't found anything. Have you?
-
Criminal PIs are not licensed/allowed in Portugal.
Really?
Here are two, after a 5-second google search.
http://www.informetodo.pt/eng/
http://www.detectivemariocosta.com/
-
I have really got to laugh at some of the comments in defense of the McCanns actions when Kate McCann herself has admitted that they engaged in 'technically illegal' activity by employing private investigators. One assumes that Antonio Martins, president of the National Association of Portuguese Judges and Carlos Anjos, the head of Portugal's criminal police federation, knew what they were talking about when they said that the McCanns risked being prosecuted for interference in a criminal investigation. The Smiths refused to cooperate with these Spanish rogues and rightly so, one wonders how many others were harassed in the name of justice?
If anyone damaged the search for the truth I have no doubt Método 3 and Oakley International are high on the list!
-
Why haven't The McCanns been arrested and charged with illegal activities? That's what I want to know.
-
I have really got to laugh at some of the comments in defense of the McCanns actions when Kate McCann herself has admitted that they engaged in 'technically illegal' activity by employing private investigators. One assumes that Antonio Martins, president of the National Association of Portuguese Judges and Carlos Anjos, the head of Portugal's criminal police federation, knew what they were talking about when they said that the McCanns risked being prosecuted for interference in a criminal investigation. The Smiths refused to cooperate with these Spanish rogues and rightly so, one wonders how many others were harassed in the name of justice?
If anyone damaged the search for the truth I have no doubt Método 3 and Oakley International are high on the list!
Have you found the law that prohibits private investigations yet, John?
-
Have you found the law that prohibits private investigations yet, John?
It is illegal to run a private investigation while an official one is still open. Do you understand? I know that homicide is illegal in Portugal but I do not know the references to that law and I am not about to waste my time looking up the penal code for you.
-
It is illegal to run a private investigation while an official one is still open. Do you understand? I know that homicide is illegal in Portugal but I do not know the references to that law and I am not about to waste my time looking up the penal code for you.
I'm not deaf. But I did look and didn't find anything that could constitute a blanket prohibition. I thought that perhaps you had. So you haven't, either?
-
It is illegal to run a private investigation while an official one is still open. Do you understand? I know that homicide is illegal in Portugal but I do not know the references to that law and I am not about to waste my time looking up the penal code for you.
if you cannot quote the law then your claim is without foundation and possibly untrue
-
I have really got to laugh at some of the comments in defense of the McCanns actions when Kate McCann herself has admitted that they engaged in 'technically illegal' activity by employing private investigators. One assumes that Antonio Martins, president of the National Association of Portuguese Judges and Carlos Anjos, the head of Portugal's criminal police federation, knew what they were talking about when they said that the McCanns risked being prosecuted for interference in a criminal investigation. The Smiths refused to cooperate with these Spanish rogues and rightly so, one wonders how many others were harassed in the name of justice?
If anyone damaged the search for the truth I have no doubt Método 3 and Oakley International are high on the list!
Kate has not admitted illegal activity and no one has been able to quote the law...very suspect
-
I have really got to laugh at some of the comments in defense of the McCanns actions when Kate McCann herself has admitted that they engaged in 'technically illegal' activity by employing private investigators. One assumes that Antonio Martins, president of the National Association of Portuguese Judges and Carlos Anjos, the head of Portugal's criminal police federation, knew what they were talking about when they said that the McCanns risked being prosecuted for interference in a criminal investigation. The Smiths refused to cooperate with these Spanish rogues and rightly so, one wonders how many others were harassed in the name of justice?
If anyone damaged the search for the truth I have no doubt Método 3 and Oakley International are high on the list!
Maybe, but first on the list would be the PJ and Amaral, I think most people would agree on that.
-
It is illegal to run a private investigation while an official one is still open. Do you understand? I know that homicide is illegal in Portugal but I do not know the references to that law and I am not about to waste my time looking up the penal code for you.
Nicely put.
Unfortunately, there are those people who will defend the mccanns.
For them, it doesn't matter if they break the law. >@@(*&)
-
Kate has not admitted illegal activity and no one has been able to quote the law...very suspect
Amaral ACTUALLY broke the law and was punished for it. Strangely this is something sceptics seek to excuse at every opportunity by claiming it was only a technicality and that really he's as innocent as a new born babe and twice as honourable.
-
Maybe, but first on the list would be the PJ and Amaral, I think most people would agree on that.
i.e. the mccann saupporters.
-
I suspect what is illegal, in Portugal and in most countries, is to conduct a private investigation, in parallel with an official police investigation on Portuguese soil.
But so long as your investigators are not based on Portuguese soil, I suspect there can be no objection ...
-
I suspect what is illegal, in Portugal and in most countries, is to conduct a private investigation, in parallel with an official police investigation on Portuguese soil.
But so long as your investigators are not based on Portuguese soil, I suspect there can be no objection ...
162 posts and still no proof Kate broke the law
-
Kate says it all:
"Our first investigators, the Spanish company Método 3, began working for us in October. With private investigations technicaly ilegal in Portugal, we felt the closest we could get would be a firm from somewhere on the Iberian Peninsula, which would have the advantage of familiarity with local systems, culture and geography and the best network of contacts in the region."
They based their private investigators outside Portugal to stay legal.
End of argument ...
-
Kate says it all:
"Our first investigators, the Spanish company Método 3, began working for us in October. With private investigations technicaly ilegal in Portugal, we felt the closest we could get would be a firm from somewhere on the Iberian Peninsula, which would have the advantage of familiarity with local systems, culture and geography and the best network of contacts in the region."
They based their private investigators outside Portugal to stay legal.
End of argument ...
Hardly. 8((()*/
As investigations took place in Portugal.
OR DIDN'T YOU WATCH THE PROGRAM ?
-
OR DIDN'T YOU WATCH THE PROGRAM ?
I am not American and until, literally, the last couple of weeks, i have never had a television ...
-
OR DIDN'T YOU WATCH THE PROGRAM ?
I am not American and until, literally, the last couple of weeks, i have never had a television ...
What are you on about ?
-
What are you on about ?
I'm not the least bit surprised you don't understand ...
-
An example of how the McCanns interference in this case was detrimental to its outcome...
Cops let Maddie suspect off hook The Sun
By SIMON HUGHES and ANTONELLA LAZZERI
Published: Today (29 June 2009)
A SUSPECT in the Madeleine McCann case was let off the hook — after a private detective tailing him was deported by cops.
The detective was told to leave Portugal after the suspect complained.
It is illegal in Portugal to run a private investigation into a crime when a police one is still active. As a result of the deportation, the suspect had nearly a year to get rid of any possible evidence against him.
The man lived near the holiday complex in Praia da Luz where Maddie, three, disappeared on May 3, 2007.
A source close to the McCann family last night accused Portuguese cops of "hindering" the investigation, adding: "It's a disgrace."
The detective was working for the Spanish firm initially hired by Kate and Gerry McCann. Their British investigators are now looking into the man.
www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/madeleine/2505189/Cops-let-Maddie-suspect-off-hook.html
-
I'm not the least bit surprised you don't understand ...
With that comment ferryman you have gone from tthe ridiculous to the complete inane.
-
By SIMON HUGHES and ANTONELLA LAZZERI
Published: Today (29 June 2009)
The first enquiry was shelved on 4 August 2008 ...
-
By SIMON HUGHES and ANTONELLA LAZZERI
Published: Today (29 June 2009)
The first enquiry was shelved on 4 August 2008 ...
And Método 3 were sacked at the end of February 2008 so this event happened well before the archive.
-
And Método 3 were sacked at the end of February 2008 so this event happened well before the archive.
do we know they were referring to metodo and not halligen
-
From the article:
It is illegal in Portugal to run a private investigation into a crime when a police one is still active.
At the time, there was no active police investigation.
-
From the article:
It is illegal in Portugal to run a private investigation into a crime when a police one is still active.
At the time, there was no active police investigation.
The sun article ??
Now that's a good one. @)(++(* @)(++(* @)(++(*
-
Maybe, but first on the list would be the PJ and Amaral, I think most people would agree on that.
That sir would depend on how one is defining "most people".
Taking the world population as the whole "most people" sharing the view you have expressed would seem to be improbable.
-
That sir would depend on how one is defining "most people".
Taking the world population as the whole "most people" sharing the view you have expressed would seem to be improbable.
Most people with an opinion of the way the PJ handled the Madeleine McCann case I meant, not the entire population of the world (the vast majority of whom have no idea what the PJ is or who Amaral is, I'm sure you'd agree madam).
-
From the article:
It is illegal in Portugal to run a private investigation into a crime when a police one is still active.
At the time, there was no active police investigation.
The incident was pre archive regardless of when the article was written. What I want to know is why they weren't prosecuted for purposely obstructing an official police investigation.
-
The incident was pre archive regardless of when the article was written. What I want to know is why they weren't prosecuted for purposely obstructing an official police investigation.
No-one has been able to provide a cite detailing any illegal activity ... that is because there was none.
They weren't prosecuted for your ridiculous suggestion that they were purposely obstructing an official police investigation ... because that nonsense has no basis in fact.
As can be seen from the entirely different focus of the new investigation into Madeleine's case, the original investigators had already taken entirely the wrong route which led only to a dead end.
There would have been no conflict with the police operation; for the simple reason that the private investigators were trying to find Madeleine; the official investigators were trying to pin her disappearance on her parents; two entirely different cases.
-
No-one has been able to provide a cite detailing any illegal activity ... that is because there was none.
They weren't prosecuted for your ridiculous suggestion that they were purposely obstructing an official police investigation ... because that nonsense has no basis in fact.
As can be seen from the entirely different focus of the new investigation into Madeleine's case, the original investigators had already taken entirely the wrong route which led only to a dead end.
There would have been no conflict with the police operation; for the simple reason that the private investigators were trying to find Madeleine; the official investigators were trying to pin her disappearance on her parents; two entirely different cases.
Several cites have been provided so take the rose speckled blinkers off! Kate McCann even tried to justify their criminal activity by referring to it as 'technically illegal' in her book of thoughts. It appears there is one law for Amaral and another for the McCanns so no wonder they fled the country when the heat was on them.
-
Several cites have been provided so take the rose speckled blinkers off! Kate McCann even tried to justify their criminal activity by referring to it as 'technically illegal' in her book of thoughts. It appears there is one law for Amaral and another for the McCanns so no wonder they fled the country when the heat was on them.
No cites have been able to quote the exact law..Kate never admitted to breaking any law in her book
-
No cites have been able to quote the exact law..Kate never admitted to breaking any law in her book
Sorry Angelo but this makes me so very angry. The Mccanns made it impossible for the Portuguese investigation to continue when they high tailed it out of PdL after saying they would never leave without Madeleine. When they didn't get it all their own way they set up an illegal alternative investigation using people who can only be described as criminals and conmen and used money donated by well meaning British people to support it.
-
No cites have been able to quote the exact law..Kate never admitted to breaking any law in her book
The law of contempt is universal and she did admit in her book of thoughts to technically illegal activities. Suggest you should read it again my friend.
-
The law of contempt is universal and she did admit in her book of thoughts to technically illegal activities. Suggest you should read it again my friend.
You beat me to it Matt. Davel is well practised in the art of obfuscation @)(++(* 8((()*/
If some of the most senior officials in Portugal considered it illegal then it is good enough for me. The only part which surprises me is that more wasn't made of it or done about it but then who knows what's down the road ???
-
No cites have been able to quote the exact law..Kate never admitted to breaking any law in her book
I do believe, sir, you are blinded to reality by your worship of the McCanns. If the McCanns said the moon was made of green cheese you would probably believe they were correct and statements to the contrary would in your view be a criticism of the McCanns.
-
I do believe, sir, you are blinded to reality by your worship of the McCanns. If the McCanns said the moon was made of green cheese you would probably believe they were correct and statements to the contrary would in your view be a criticism of the McCanns.
you believe this because you do not understand the evidence in this case...like a lot of posters on these forums. if you did understand the evidence you would no doubt agree with me.
This thread is a good example...no where does Kate admit to breaking the law ...and no one has been able to produce the law she has allegedly broke
-
I do believe, sir, you are blinded to reality by your worship of the McCanns. If the McCanns said the moon was made of green cheese you would probably believe they were correct and statements to the contrary would in your view be a criticism of the McCanns.
If there was evidence to back up the entirely hypothetical statement that the moon was made of green cheese, I would certainly give the proposition some consideration, but the sources would have to be impeccable.
That no-one is able to provide a source to prove assertions of illegality … puts that on a very unsound footing indeed.
Do you have one?
-
If there was evidence to back up the entirely hypothetical statement that the moon was made of green cheese, I would certainly give the proposition some consideration, but the sources would have to be impeccable.
That no-one is able to provide a source to prove assertions of illegality … puts that on a very unsound footing indeed.
Do you have one?
Well Kate McCann certainly thinks it's illegal and she should know. Isn't that good enough for you ?
How strangely perverse that supporters are now asking for a cite for Kate's claim. Seem they have added saving Kate and Gerry from self incrimination to the agenda.
-
Well Kate McCann certainly thinks it's illegal and she should know. Isn't that good enough for you ?
How strangely perverse that supporters are now asking for a cite for Kate's claim. Seem they have added saving Kate and Gerry from self incrimination to the agenda.
@)(++(* 8@??)( technically illegal!! @)(++(* and this from the woman who called the police liaison officer a f.....g tosser numerous times in her book. The McCann diatribe for anything or anyone who opposes them.
-
you believe this because you do not understand the evidence in this case...like a lot of posters on these forums. if you did understand the evidence you would no doubt agree with me.
This thread is a good example...no where does Kate admit to breaking the law ...and no one has been able to produce the law she has allegedly broke
According to whom?
It may have escaped your attention that outside of this forum is a rather large world with access to much information about the case that extends a little beyond the partisanship displayed by your good self.
-
You beat me to it Matt. Davel is well practised in the art of obfuscation @)(++(* 8((()*/
If some of the most senior officials in Portugal considered it illegal then it is good enough for me. The only part which surprises me is that more wasn't made of it or done about it but then who knows what's down the road ???
Who are they and where are they cited?
Has anyone found a blanket law against any kind of private investigation - barring illegal means - yet?
-
If there was evidence to back up the entirely hypothetical statement that the moon was made of green cheese, I would certainly give the proposition some consideration, but the sources would have to be impeccable.
That no-one is able to provide a source to prove assertions of illegality … puts that on a very unsound footing indeed.
Do you have one?
Try reading Kate McCanns book it is in there that "technically" they broke the law.
Or is it now time for all to be selective in what in the book is right and what is wrong?
-
According to whom?
It may have escaped your attention that outside of this forum is a rather large world with access to much information about the case that extends a little beyond the partisanship displayed by your good self.
Perhaps you could share some of your information with credible sources as a reference?
-
In her book called Madeleine, Kate McCann admits that the employing of private investigators to undertake investigations in Portugal was 'technically illegal'. Given that this renders the McCanns technically criminal by their own admission are they really so different from Amaral?
From Madeleine.
"Our first investigators, the Spanish company Método 3, began working for us in October. With private investigations technicaly ilegal in Portugal, we felt the closest we could get would be a firm from somewhere on the Iberian Peninsula, which would have the advantage of familiarity with local systems, culture and geography and the best network of contacts in the region."
Suggest Davel reads the opening post, I can interpret it for him if he likes.
As for the law suggest perverting the course of justice for starters.
-
Suggest Davel reads the opening post, I can interpret it for him if he likes.
As for the law suggest perverting the course of justice for starters.
"With private investigations technicaly ilegal in Portugal"
I still have no idea where that idea came from. Unless anyone can point out a blanket law, it may well be a widespread misconception, possibly promoted on PT TV by various supposedly expert pundits.
-
Suggest Davel reads the opening post, I can interpret it for him if he likes.
As for the law suggest perverting the course of justice for starters.
Kate does not admit to breaking the law in the opening post...you are putting your own intepretation on it
-
Try reading Kate McCanns book it is in there that "technically" they broke the law.
Or is it now time for all to be selective in what in the book is right and what is wrong?
In other words ... you do not have an authoritative Portuguese source for your claim of illegality.
-
Kate does not admit to breaking the law in the opening post...you are putting your own intepretation on it
So what is your interpretation of what she wrote ?
-
Irrelevant.
Still no cite has been provided ... and that is extremely relevant.
Not irrelevant at all.
And if you would like a cite could I respectfully suggest you contact Kate.
-
Suggest Davel reads the opening post, I can interpret it for him if he likes.
As for the law suggest perverting the course of justice for starters.
There is no doubt a law about perverting the course of justice. I have no issue with that. But what evidence is there as to who may have infringed such a law?
Judicial secrecy was most definitely infringed... but largely by PT authority employees leaking to the tabloids....
-
In other words ... you do not have an authoritative Portuguese source for your claim of illegality.
Ha ha ; I thought Portuguese sources were considered to be unreliable by some?
I do recall posting a link on 13th July so you could look at that.
Why do you not believe Kate McCann's comment in her book? Is is because it does not suit your purpose my dear?
-
Perhaps you could share some of your information with credible sources as a reference?
Do you mean you have no information?
How unfortunate.
-
Do you mean you have no information?
How unfortunate.
I was expecting that you might have some. Do you?
-
I was expecting that you might have some. Do you?
Read this quick as most of it is off topic and will no doubt be redacted.
About the same as you I would imagine. There is plenty of information on the net but it is a tedious question of separating sheep from goats and most of us have better things to do; indeed just other things to do.
With regard to whether or not running a private investigation parallel with a police criminal investigation is illegal in Portugal who knows? I would imagine if one wrote to a Portuguese Advogado one would obtain a definitive answer at a price.
The nearest we have is the suggestion in Kate McCann's book that were doing something "technically illegal" and the article in the Daily Telegraph that I have already posted a link to.
According to Wikipedia which is not renowned for its accuracy:
"In some countries, the practice of a detective is not yet recognized in courts and judicial processes. One of these countries is Portugal, where the proof presented loses all the significance when collected by a private detective. Even under this circumstance, the practice of this activity is in demand, and ruled by a code of conduct".
Whether or not the practice is illegal, private investigators everywhere can run foul of obstructing the course of justice. In the United States private investigators have been subject to rigorous examination in knowledge of the law and investigation before being granted a licence. In 2007 in the United Kingdom every man jack could set themselves up as PI without requiring a licence as there was no licensing arrangement then; that may still apply but in 2013 the Home Sec. was proposing a system in the UK similar to the US.
-
Read this quick as most of it is off topic and will no doubt be redacted.
About the same as you I would imagine. There is plenty of information on the net but it is a tedious question of separating sheep from goats and most of us have better things to do; indeed just other things to do.
With regard to whether or not running a private investigation parallel with a police criminal investigation is illegal in Portugal who knows? I would imagine if one wrote to a Portuguese Advogado one would obtain a definitive answer at a price.
The nearest we have is the suggestion in Kate McCann's book that were doing something "technically illegal" and the article in the Daily Telegraph that I have already posted a link to.
According to Wikipedia which is not renowned for its accuracy:
"In some countries, the practice of a detective is not yet recognized in courts and judicial processes. One of these countries is Portugal, where the proof presented loses all the significance when collected by a private detective. Even under this circumstance, the practice of this activity is in demand, and ruled by a code of conduct".
Whether or not the practice is illegal, private investigators everywhere can run foul of obstructing the course of justice. In the United States private investigators have been subject to rigorous examination in knowledge of the law and investigation before being granted a licence. In 2007 in the United Kingdom every man jack could set themselves up as PI without requiring a licence as there was no licensing arrangement then; that may still apply but in 2013 the Home Sec. was proposing a system in the UK similar to the US.
Thanks. I don't see what's off topic.
"In some countries, the practice of a detective is not yet recognized in courts and judicial processes. One of these countries is Portugal, where the proof presented loses all the significance when collected by a private detective. Even under this circumstance, the practice of this activity is in demand, and ruled by a code of conduct".
Whether or not the practice is illegal, private investigators everywhere can run foul of obstructing the course of justice.
I still don't see what was illegal.
- PIs evidence not yet recognised as evidence in court... yes, well, quite possibly. And? No court has come to trial yet.
- Yes, of course, PIs can fall foul of the law in terms of how they gather info... but what did they actually do as opposed to what media pundits assumed they may have done?
- If the PIs handed over their info to the police, it would have been up to the police to verify.
- If they didn't use illegal means... what's illegal?
-
Thanks. I don't see what's off topic.
"In some countries, the practice of a detective is not yet recognized in courts and judicial processes. One of these countries is Portugal, where the proof presented loses all the significance when collected by a private detective. Even under this circumstance, the practice of this activity is in demand, and ruled by a code of conduct".
Whether or not the practice is illegal, private investigators everywhere can run foul of obstructing the course of justice.
I still don't see what was illegal.
- PIs evidence not yet recognised as evidence in court... yes, well, quite possibly. And? No court has come to trial yet.
- Yes, of course, PIs can fall foul of the law in terms of how they gather info... but what did they actually do as opposed to what media pundits assumed they may have done?
- If the PIs handed over their info to the police, it would have been up to the police to verify.
- If they didn't use illegal means... what's illegal?
The only "evidence" is a Telegraph article from 2007 and a comment in Kate McCanns book.
All the rest remains unfortunately speculation. I would speculate that even were there a law against it, unless the PI's in Portugal, presuming they were in Portugal, seriously impeded the police investigation or intimidated police witnesses they would perhaps be given a quiet warning by the police, if it came to light, and no more but that we shall never know. The PI's would be under obligation only to their paymasters so the police would not necessarily be privy to the information garnered.
-
The only "evidence" is a Telegraph article from 2007 and a comment in Kate McCanns book.
All the rest remains unfortunately speculation. I would speculate that even were there a law against it, unless the PI's in Portugal, presuming they were in Portugal, seriously impeded the police investigation or intimidated police witnesses they would perhaps be given a quiet warning by the police, if it came to light, and no more but that we shall never know. The PI's would be under obligation only to their paymasters so the police would not necessarily be privy to the information garnered.
Thanks for your reply.
I have no problem imagining that if journos had gone to the PJ or any ex-PJ pundit and asked how they'd like US-style big-boots bounty-type hunters on their turf, they would have not been very pleased at the idea and would have said so in no uncertain terms. Whereupon, the hacks merrily noted the comments and had got their copy for the day / week.
However, there simply doesn't seem to be anything verifiable that the PIs actually did do anything illegal.
At the moment, the blanket statement that a private investigation is illegal on PT territory seems to be a myth.
-
I do not want to turn into Stephen but since you are also becoming a tad repetative I may as well join in ... sighhhhh ... put up or shut up (with all due respect) and ... provide a cite for your assertion.
I didn't assert anything, Kate did.
Now at the risk of becoming repetitive, don't you believe her ?
-
Read this quick as most of it is off topic and will no doubt be redacted.
About the same as you I would imagine. There is plenty of information on the net but it is a tedious question of separating sheep from goats and most of us have better things to do; indeed just other things to do.
With regard to whether or not running a private investigation parallel with a police criminal investigation is illegal in Portugal who knows? I would imagine if one wrote to a Portuguese Advogado one would obtain a definitive answer at a price.
The nearest we have is the suggestion in Kate McCann's book that were doing something "technically illegal" and the article in the Daily Telegraph that I have already posted a link to.
According to Wikipedia which is not renowned for its accuracy:
"In some countries, the practice of a detective is not yet recognized in courts and judicial processes. One of these countries is Portugal, where the proof presented loses all the significance when collected by a private detective. Even under this circumstance, the practice of this activity is in demand, and ruled by a code of conduct".
Whether or not the practice is illegal, private investigators everywhere can run foul of obstructing the course of justice. In the United States private investigators have been subject to rigorous examination in knowledge of the law and investigation before being granted a licence. In 2007 in the United Kingdom every man jack could set themselves up as PI without requiring a licence as there was no licensing arrangement then; that may still apply but in 2013 the Home Sec. was proposing a system in the UK similar to the US.
The nearest we have is the suggestion in Kate McCann's book that were doing something "technically illegal"
We don't have that suggestion in Kate's book.
Kate says that so as to stay legal, they based their private investigators outside Portugal ...
As to the technical point of whether private investigators can operate inside Portugal in tandem with an official police enquiry into the same matter, it seems (to me!) intuitively logical that such a practice might be outlawed, but Carana says she can find nothing to that effect in the Portuguese penal code.
I really can't comment ...
-
So you state that you do not know the law re private investigations in Portugal and everything is speculation...glad that's cleared up
Well sir I don't believe I suggested that I did. I only said that it was stated in a media article in 2007 that private investigations of criminal activities are illegal while the police investigation is live.
Tell us what do you know about Portuguese law sir that leads you to believe the article was incorrect; other than blind prejudice and a belief you know everything?
Or do you just gainsay for the sake of it?
-
Well sir I don't believe I suggested that I did. I only said that it was stated in a media article in 2007 that private investigations of criminal activities are illegal while the police investigation is live.
Tell us what do you know about Portuguese law sir that leads you to believe the article was incorrect; other than blind prejudice and a belief you know everything?
Or do you just gainsay for the sake of it?
I never said the article was incorrect but like most newspaper articles its accuracy is not guaranteed...I certainly would not accuse someone of breaking the law on such limited information
-
I never said the article was incorrect but like most newspaper articles its accuracy is not guaranteed...I certainly would not accuse someone of breaking the law on such limited information
It remains that you have failed to avail us of your knowledge of Portuguese law as was asked. As you normally so readily respond one must assume you have no knowledge of Portuguese law. Much the same as most of the rest as it were.
-
It remains that you have failed to avail us of your knowledge of Portuguese law as was asked. As you normally so readily respond one must assume you have no knowledge of Portuguese law. Much the same as most of the rest as it were.
OoooO, you're such a card AP ! Ma'am
Your gobblededook creases me up @)(++(*
-
OoooO, you're such a card AP ! Ma'am
Your gobblededook creases me up @)(++(*
It's called English.
-
Now why would anyone choose avatars of Annie Lennox and Freddy Mercury?. That my dears really is weird. Merciful heavens Sadie please try harder; Dorothy Parker you are not my dear.
Dorothy Parker. Now there's was a lady with a razor sharp tongue and the intellect to use it to its best effect.
“You can't teach an old dogma new tricks.”
How very true.
-
Dorothy Parker. Now there's was a lady with a razor sharp tongue and the intellect to use it to its best effect.
“You can't teach an old dogma new tricks.”
How very true.
Did you misspell in there somewhere my dear?
-
Read this quick as most of it is off topic and will no doubt be redacted.
About the same as you I would imagine. There is plenty of information on the net but it is a tedious question of separating sheep from goats and most of us have better things to do; indeed just other things to do.
With regard to whether or not running a private investigation parallel with a police criminal investigation is illegal in Portugal who knows? I would imagine if one wrote to a Portuguese Advogado one would obtain a definitive answer at a price.
The nearest we have is the suggestion in Kate McCann's book that were doing something "technically illegal" and the article in the Daily Telegraph that I have already posted a link to.
According to Wikipedia which is not renowned for its accuracy:
"In some countries, the practice of a detective is not yet recognized in courts and judicial processes. One of these countries is Portugal, where the proof presented loses all the significance when collected by a private detective. Even under this circumstance, the practice of this activity is in demand, and ruled by a code of conduct".
Whether or not the practice is illegal, private investigators everywhere can run foul of obstructing the course of justice. In the United States private investigators have been subject to rigorous examination in knowledge of the law and investigation before being granted a licence. In 2007 in the United Kingdom every man jack could set themselves up as PI without requiring a licence as there was no licensing arrangement then; that may still apply but in 2013 the Home Sec. was proposing a system in the UK similar to the US.
The Portuguese Code of Practice (http://www.adetectives.com/?lang=2) came in on 10 August 2007 but since Método 3 and Oakley were both based outside of Portugal neither complied with it. Back in 2007 the Portuguese police were the only entity who could legally investigate crime since private investigators were not recognised by the judicial authorities.
Kate McCann would have taken advice before writing in her book that private criminal investigations were technically illegal in Portugal thus why they employed one who was based in Spain. She failed to expand on that statement however since to do so would have opened a much larger can of worms.
As stated previously, the illegality is not set by Statute under the Portuguese Penal Code but arises where there is interference in the official investigation. We know that witnesses were harangued and harassed by agents acting on behalf of the McCanns and that is where the damage was done. They had in effect perverted the course of justice.
From Madeleine by Kate McCann
"Our first investigators, the Spanish company Método 3, began working for us in October. With private investigations technicaly ilegal in Portugal, we felt the closest we could get would be a firm from somewhere on the Iberian Peninsula, which would have the advantage of familiarity with local systems, culture and geography and the best network of contacts in the region."
Closest we could get? What Kate McCann fails to recognise is that it is irrelevant where the pi's are based since any interference in an official investigation is tantamount to illegal activity under the Portuguese judicial system. In the event however the point is academic since Método 3 did not restrict their activities to beyond Portugal's borders but undertook work paid for by the Madeleine Fund inside Portugal in direct opposition to the Portuguese Police.
-
The Portuguese Code of Practice (http://www.adetectives.com/?lang=2) came in on 10 August 2007 but since Método 3 and Oakley were both based outside of Portugal neither complied with it. Back in 2007 the Portuguese police were the only entity who could legally investigate crime since private investigators were not recognised by the judicial authorities.
Kate McCann would have taken advice before writing in her book that private criminal investigations were technically illegal in Portugal thus why they employed one who was based in Spain. She failed to expand on that statement however since to do so would have opened a much larger can of worms.
As stated previously, the illegality is not set by Statute under the Portuguese Penal Code but arises where there is interference in the official investigation. We know that witnesses were harangued and harassed by agents acting on behalf of the McCanns and that is where the damage was done. They had in effect perverted the course of justice.
From Madeleine by Kate McCann
"Our first investigators, the Spanish company Método 3, began working for us in October. With private investigations technicaly ilegal in Portugal, we felt the closest we could get would be a firm from somewhere on the Iberian Peninsula, which would have the advantage of familiarity with local systems, culture and geography and the best network of contacts in the region."
Closest we could get? What Kate McCann fails to recognise is that it is irrelevant where the pi's are based since any interference in an official investigation is tantamount to illegal activity under the Portuguese judicial system. In the event however the point is academic since Método 3 did not restrict their activities to beyond Portugal's borders but undertook work paid for by the Madeleine Fund inside Portugal in direct opposition to the Portuguese Police.
Excellent summation.
8@??)( 8@??)( 8@??)(
-
Added
Antonio Martins, President of the National Association of Portuguese Judges, told the newspaper 24 Horas: "It is still up to the state to carry out criminal investigation. That kind of activity has no legal standing.
"Anything that results from private investigation has no substance."
Mr Martins said the private detectives and even the McCanns themselves could be accused of "obstruction of justice".
and...
Carlos Anjos, the head of Portugal's criminal police federation, added: "This can only be another diversion tactic from the McCanns. It is nothing but folklore.
"Portugal does not have legislation in this area. Private detectives who intervene in criminal cases cannot exist.
"The law only tolerates private detectives who gather information and only about matters of the private lives of certain people like extramarital relationships."
A separate police source warned that the involvement of investigators may not only be illegal but could have a detrimental effect on the inquiry.
The high ranking official told newspaper Correio da Manha: "If private investigators come here they will be running a serious risk of being arrested."
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1564121/Madeleine-McCann-police-fury-over-private-hunt.html
So there we had it from Antonio Martins, President of the National Association of Portuguese Judges and Carlos Anjos, the head of Portugal's criminal police federation, does anyone believe they are better placed to quote Portuguese Law?
-
Did you misspell in there somewhere my dear?
I did indeed, damn predictor text !!
-
Added
Antonio Martins, President of the National Association of Portuguese Judges, told the newspaper 24 Horas: "It is still up to the state to carry out criminal investigation. That kind of activity has no legal standing.
"Anything that results from private investigation has no substance."
Mr Martins said the private detectives and even the McCanns themselves could be accused of "obstruction of justice".
and...
Carlos Anjos, the head of Portugal's criminal police federation, added: "This can only be another diversion tactic from the McCanns. It is nothing but folklore.
"Portugal does not have legislation in this area. Private detectives who intervene in criminal cases cannot exist.
"The law only tolerates private detectives who gather information and only about matters of the private lives of certain people like extramarital relationships."
A separate police source warned that the involvement of investigators may not only be illegal but could have a detrimental effect on the inquiry.
The high ranking official told newspaper Correio da Manha: "If private investigators come here they will be running a serious risk of being arrested."
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1564121/Madeleine-McCann-police-fury-over-private-hunt.html
So there we had it from Antonio Martins, President of the National Association of Portuguese Judges and Carlos Anjos, the head of Portugal's criminal police federation, does anyone believe they are better placed to quote Portuguese Law?
Did private investigators operate in Portugal on behalf of the McCanns whilst the investigation was live and were any of them arrested?
-
Added
Antonio Martins, President of the National Association of Portuguese Judges, told the newspaper 24 Horas: "It is still up to the state to carry out criminal investigation. That kind of activity has no legal standing.
"Anything that results from private investigation has no substance."
Mr Martins said the private detectives and even the McCanns themselves could be accused of "obstruction of justice".
and...
Carlos Anjos, the head of Portugal's criminal police federation, added: "This can only be another diversion tactic from the McCanns. It is nothing but folklore.
"Portugal does not have legislation in this area. Private detectives who intervene in criminal cases cannot exist.
"The law only tolerates private detectives who gather information and only about matters of the private lives of certain people like extramarital relationships."
A separate police source warned that the involvement of investigators may not only be illegal but could have a detrimental effect on the inquiry.
The high ranking official told newspaper Correio da Manha: "If private investigators come here they will be running a serious risk of being arrested."
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1564121/Madeleine-McCann-police-fury-over-private-hunt.html
So there we had it from Antonio Martins, President of the National Association of Portuguese Judges and Carlos Anjos, the head of Portugal's criminal police federation, does anyone believe they are better placed to quote Portuguese Law?
neither martins nor Carlos Anjos say that a private investigation is illegal...they say they MAY be charged with obstruction...that's all
-
neither martins nor Carlos Anjos say that a private investigation is illegal...they say they MAY be charged with obstruction...that's all
More specifically:
The high ranking official told newspaper Correio da Manha: "If private investigators come here they will be running a serious risk of being arrested."
The implicit message is clear:
Keep your private investigators off our patch and you'll be fine ...
The McCanns did.
And they were/are fine ...
-
More specifically:
The high ranking official told newspaper Correio da Manha: "If private investigators come here they will be running a serious risk of being arrested."
The implicit message is clear:
Keep your private investigators off our patch and you'll be fine ...
The McCanns did.
And they were/are fine ...
The mccanns didn't get their hands dirty, their employees did.
-
More specifically:
The high ranking official told newspaper Correio da Manha: "If private investigators come here they will be running a serious risk of being arrested."
The implicit message is clear:
Keep your private investigators off our patch and you'll be fine[/i] ...
The McCanns did.
And they were/are fine ...
The child disappeared in Portugal, sir. If the investigators were not in Portugal is does rather invite two questions.
If the investigators were not in Portugal where were they?.
What did investigators hope to achieve conducting investigations outside Portugal?
-
The PJ didn’t seem too concerned about the involvement of M3 in Madeleine’s case … the fact that they met with them and received information from them concerning the case … suggests that within the set parameters there was no illegality involved.
So they were well aware of the involvement of Private Investigators ... they may not have been ecstatically happy about it ... but, as can be seen from the files, they actually carried out an investigation of part of the information given to them by M3.
Volume XIII Pages 3434 - 3436
Service Information 2007.11.14
To: Coordinator of the Criminal Investigation
From: Joao Carlos, Inspector
Concerning the investigation of the disappearance of the British minor, Madeleine McCann, I present you Sir with the following:
On the 19th of October, we were contacted by the Commissary General, located in Madrid, by the Chief of the Kidnapping Unit, Alberto Carbas, who passed to us the information that the McCann family had contracted a Spanish company known as 'METODO 3', composed of Spanish private detectives. This business, or in other words, the costs of the activities of this business were being covered by a Scottish multi-millionaire whose name is BRIAN KENNEDY and whose objective was to locate the British minor.
With this information, we were asked if we were available and interested in meeting with a representative of this Spanish business, and also with the Commissary General and Chief of the Kidnapping Unit of the Police of our neighbouring country, whose operation is in Madrid.
The meeting had as its objective to receive on behalf of the private detectives, from that moment and for their own wishes, relevant information with the aim to ascertain the truth, and to state that they would not interfere in police work, and at most they would serve as a complement to some useful information. They firmly state that they are not working directly for the McCann family, but for Brian Kennedy and that their sole purpose is to locate the missing child, or to gather the inescapable truth of what happened.
They did not ask for any information regarding the investigation, nor was any offered to them, for obvious reasons as this is found incorporated in the Portuguese penal process.
On the 13th of the current year, in the presence of the signatory and inspectors Paulo Ferreira and Ricardo Paiva, a meeting was held, in this department, with Brian Kennedy, the director of the detective company, Francisco Marco and an advisor of this same company, Antonio Jimenez, ex-chief of the Kidnapping Unit of Catalan. From the beginning, Brian Kennedy was questioned, and ascertained that the meeting only had this scope--of transmitting that his objective in all of this was purely charitable in that he is interested [in helping to stop] the bad treatment of minors and in missing children. He affirmed that he only was interested in discovering the truth and nothing more even if the McCann family, the friends, or any other person is found to be involved in the disappearance.
During the course of this meeting, the director of METODO 3 gave us a small book (attached), with information relative to the disappearance of the minor. This information, as we were told, was received via telephone and that they had already opened a line in Spain, specifically to receive and deal with information.
In this book, written in Spanish, we can analyse three pieces of information:
1. In the first case, we observed that there was report of facts which occurred in August/September of 2006, and which appears to us somewhat extemporaneous, as it cannot now be related to the material under investigation.
2. In the second point, we should remember that the computers of Sergey Malinka were searched and that nothing of suspicion was found there or related to paedophilia.
3. In that which concerns the third point, we are currently carrying out diligences with the intent to confirm or disprove the related information.
With nothing more to report.
Joao Carlos, Inspector
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/BRIAN-KENNEDY.htm
-
The PJ didn’t seem too concerned about the involvement of M3 in Madeleine’s case … the fact that they met with them and received information from them concerning the case … suggests that within the set parameters there was no illegality involved.
So they were well aware of the involvement of Private Investigators ... they may not have been ecstatically happy about it ... but, as can be seen from the files, they actually carried out an investigation of part of the information given to them by M3.
Volume XIII Pages 3434 - 3436
Service Information 2007.11.14
To: Coordinator of the Criminal Investigation
From: Joao Carlos, Inspector
Concerning the investigation of the disappearance of the British minor, Madeleine McCann, I present you Sir with the following:
On the 19th of October, we were contacted by the Commissary General, located in Madrid, by the Chief of the Kidnapping Unit, Alberto Carbas, who passed to us the information that the McCann family had contracted a Spanish company known as 'METODO 3', composed of Spanish private detectives. This business, or in other words, the costs of the activities of this business were being covered by a Scottish multi-millionaire whose name is BRIAN KENNEDY and whose objective was to locate the British minor.
With this information, we were asked if we were available and interested in meeting with a representative of this Spanish business, and also with the Commissary General and Chief of the Kidnapping Unit of the Police of our neighbouring country, whose operation is in Madrid.
The meeting had as its objective to receive on behalf of the private detectives, from that moment and for their own wishes, relevant information with the aim to ascertain the truth, and to state that they would not interfere in police work, and at most they would serve as a complement to some useful information. They firmly state that they are not working directly for the McCann family, but for Brian Kennedy and that their sole purpose is to locate the missing child, or to gather the inescapable truth of what happened.
They did not ask for any information regarding the investigation, nor was any offered to them, for obvious reasons as this is found incorporated in the Portuguese penal process.
On the 13th of the current year, in the presence of the signatory and inspectors Paulo Ferreira and Ricardo Paiva, a meeting was held, in this department, with Brian Kennedy, the director of the detective company, Francisco Marco and an advisor of this same company, Antonio Jimenez, ex-chief of the Kidnapping Unit of Catalan. From the beginning, Brian Kennedy was questioned, and ascertained that the meeting only had this scope--of transmitting that his objective in all of this was purely charitable in that he is interested [in helping to stop] the bad treatment of minors and in missing children. He affirmed that he only was interested in discovering the truth and nothing more even if the McCann family, the friends, or any other person is found to be involved in the disappearance.
During the course of this meeting, the director of METODO 3 gave us a small book (attached), with information relative to the disappearance of the minor. This information, as we were told, was received via telephone and that they had already opened a line in Spain, specifically to receive and deal with information.
In this book, written in Spanish, we can analyse three pieces of information:
1. In the first case, we observed that there was report of facts which occurred in August/September of 2006, and which appears to us somewhat extemporaneous, as it cannot now be related to the material under investigation.
2. In the second point, we should remember that the computers of Sergey Malinka were searched and that nothing of suspicion was found there or related to paedophilia.
3. In that which concerns the third point, we are currently carrying out diligences with the intent to confirm or disprove the related information.
With nothing more to report.
Joao Carlos, Inspector
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/BRIAN-KENNEDY.htm
Great find, Brietta
But scarcely conducive to the theMcCannsbrokethelawandaregoingtobearrestedanyminute line some want to pursue ...
You absolute killjoy ...
-
I think arrestedanyminute is unlikely.
There are the never ending amount of false sightings & all those Luz residents with phones, hair & sofas that still need investigating.
-
The PJ didn’t seem too concerned about the involvement of M3 in Madeleine’s case … the fact that they met with them and received information from them concerning the case … suggests that within the set parameters there was no illegality involved.
So they were well aware of the involvement of Private Investigators ... they may not have been ecstatically happy about it ... but, as can be seen from the files, they actually carried out an investigation of part of the information given to them by M3.
Volume XIII Pages 3434 - 3436
Service Information 2007.11.14
To: Coordinator of the Criminal Investigation
From: Joao Carlos, Inspector
Concerning the investigation of the disappearance of the British minor, Madeleine McCann, I present you Sir with the following:
On the 19th of October, we were contacted by the Commissary General, located in Madrid, by the Chief of the Kidnapping Unit, Alberto Carbas, who passed to us the information that the McCann family had contracted a Spanish company known as 'METODO 3', composed of Spanish private detectives. This business, or in other words, the costs of the activities of this business were being covered by a Scottish multi-millionaire whose name is BRIAN KENNEDY and whose objective was to locate the British minor.
With this information, we were asked if we were available and interested in meeting with a representative of this Spanish business, and also with the Commissary General and Chief of the Kidnapping Unit of the Police of our neighbouring country, whose operation is in Madrid.
The meeting had as its objective to receive on behalf of the private detectives, from that moment and for their own wishes, relevant information with the aim to ascertain the truth, and to state that they would not interfere in police work, and at most they would serve as a complement to some useful information. They firmly state that they are not working directly for the McCann family, but for Brian Kennedy and that their sole purpose is to locate the missing child, or to gather the inescapable truth of what happened.
They did not ask for any information regarding the investigation, nor was any offered to them, for obvious reasons as this is found incorporated in the Portuguese penal process.
On the 13th of the current year, in the presence of the signatory and inspectors Paulo Ferreira and Ricardo Paiva, a meeting was held, in this department, with Brian Kennedy, the director of the detective company, Francisco Marco and an advisor of this same company, Antonio Jimenez, ex-chief of the Kidnapping Unit of Catalan. From the beginning, Brian Kennedy was questioned, and ascertained that the meeting only had this scope--of transmitting that his objective in all of this was purely charitable in that he is interested [in helping to stop] the bad treatment of minors and in missing children. He affirmed that he only was interested in discovering the truth and nothing more even if the McCann family, the friends, or any other person is found to be involved in the disappearance.
During the course of this meeting, the director of METODO 3 gave us a small book (attached), with information relative to the disappearance of the minor. This information, as we were told, was received via telephone and that they had already opened a line in Spain, specifically to receive and deal with information.
In this book, written in Spanish, we can analyse three pieces of information:
1. In the first case, we observed that there was report of facts which occurred in August/September of 2006, and which appears to us somewhat extemporaneous, as it cannot now be related to the material under investigation.
2. In the second point, we should remember that the computers of Sergey Malinka were searched and that nothing of suspicion was found there or related to paedophilia.
3. In that which concerns the third point, we are currently carrying out diligences with the intent to confirm or disprove the related information.
With nothing more to report.
Joao Carlos, Inspector
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/BRIAN-KENNEDY.htm
Seems the information gleaned from the meeting was via a Spanish information line so not really relevant. We, however, do not know what diligences Metodo3 carried out in Portugal and still have only Kate's claim that they were 'technically illegal.
As an aside it doesn't seem the PJ were too impressed with the 'information' that was offered.
-
I think arrestedanyminute is unlikely.
There are the never ending amount of false sightings & all those Luz residents with phones, hair & sofas that still need investigating.
Looks like SY officers may have a job for life.
Result !
-
Kate McCann: "With private investigations technicaly ilegal in Portugal, we felt the closest we could get would be a firm from somewhere on the Iberian Peninsula"
Where is the admission of lawbreaking in that sentence, someone kindly point it out please.
"With alcohol consumption technically illegal in Saudi Arabia, the closest we could get to having a beer was the Intercontinental hotel in Bahrain" - is this an admission of me breaking Saudi Arabian law?
-
Kate McCann: "With private investigations technicaly ilegal in Portugal, we felt the closest we could get would be a firm from somewhere on the Iberian Peninsula"
Where is the admission of lawbreaking in that sentence, someone kindly point it out please.
"With alcohol consumption technically illegal in Saudi Arabia, the closest we could get to having a beer was the Intercontinental hotel in Bahrain" - is this an admission of me breaking Saudi Arabian law?
..but the firm operated in Portugal. 8((()*/, by their own admission.
-
..but the firm operated in Portugal. 8((()*/ , by their own admission.
Which the PJ knew about in November 2007! Why weren't they arrested?
3445 to 3454 External diligence carried out re: Metodo 3, 2007.11.21
TRANSLATION BY ALBYM
13-Processo 13 Pages 3445 to 3454
Page 3445-3449: The external diligence report dated 21 November on the follow up work done
Page 3450-3453: supporting photos taken during the follow up, and
Page 3454: phone mast evidence exonerating M Walczuch, R Murat, S Malinka and L Antonio from any involvement in the alleged sighting by the truck driver.
In point form:
- The PJ traced the driver, Manuel A P Gautier, and spoke to him.
- He acknowledged speaking to M3 on 3 November.
- He and PJ met by agreement at a given location on IC1.
- The driver related his story of having seen a grey Audi and a green car (possibly Opel Astra) on 4 May between 15h00 and 17h00 in the IC1 freeway
- He saw a woman (standing next to the Audi) pass something wrapped in cloth to a man (next to the green car) over the metal fence.
- From what he could make out it was not very heavy and there was nothing to suggest it might have been a child.
- They went to the location where photos were taken.
- The resident of a nearby house was questioned by the PJ. He neither saw nor heard vehicles in his 'driveway' on 4 May, and noticed nothing untoward with the closed gate across its entrance.
- The driver stated that from pictures in the printed media he recognised some resemblance between MW and the woman he saw on 4 May, mainly some facial features, her build and hair colour, but he could not positively assert that it was her.
- The driver could not recall the man.
The PJ checked the phone antenna records for 4 May and found phone calls to and from MW, RM, SM and LA during that day, and during the time of the alleged observation, all calls showing they were all some 65 km away from the location of the alleged sighting.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/METODO_3.htm
-
Good point, Stephen's response to my query however did not highlight where in Kate McCann's book she admits to breaking Portuguese law (why am I not surprised?!)
Maybe because she doesn't as Davel points out.
From Madeleine.
"Our first investigators, the Spanish company Método 3, began working for us in October. With private investigations technicaly ilegal in Portugal, we felt the closest we could get would be a firm from somewhere on the Iberian Peninsula, which would have the advantage of familiarity with local systems, culture and geography and the best network of contacts in the region."
-
Some need to watch this again, and the admissions made.
The McCanns and the Conman - Channel 5
-
Which the PJ knew about in November 2007! Why weren't they arrested?
3445 to 3454 External diligence carried out re: Metodo 3, 2007.11.21
TRANSLATION BY ALBYM
13-Processo 13 Pages 3445 to 3454
Page 3445-3449: The external diligence report dated 21 November on the follow up work done
Page 3450-3453: supporting photos taken during the follow up, and
Page 3454: phone mast evidence exonerating M Walczuch, R Murat, S Malinka and L Antonio from any involvement in the alleged sighting by the truck driver.
In point form:
- The PJ traced the driver, Manuel A P Gautier, and spoke to him.
- He acknowledged speaking to M3 on 3 November.
- He and PJ met by agreement at a given location on IC1.
- The driver related his story of having seen a grey Audi and a green car (possibly Opel Astra) on 4 May between 15h00 and 17h00 in the IC1 freeway
- He saw a woman (standing next to the Audi) pass something wrapped in cloth to a man (next to the green car) over the metal fence.
- From what he could make out it was not very heavy and there was nothing to suggest it might have been a child.
- They went to the location where photos were taken.
- The resident of a nearby house was questioned by the PJ. He neither saw nor heard vehicles in his 'driveway' on 4 May, and noticed nothing untoward with the closed gate across its entrance.
- The driver stated that from pictures in the printed media he recognised some resemblance between MW and the woman he saw on 4 May, mainly some facial features, her build and hair colour, but he could not positively assert that it was her.
- The driver could not recall the man.
The PJ checked the phone antenna records for 4 May and found phone calls to and from MW, RM, SM and LA during that day, and during the time of the alleged observation, all calls showing they were all some 65 km away from the location of the alleged sighting.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/METODO_3.htm
Seems this was yet more unsubstantiated witness testimony from Metodo3. The PJ must have wasted hours of valuable time following up this sort of rubbish passed to them from the McCann's detectives.
One does wonder whether it was calculated misdirection or merely incompetence.
-
Seems this was yet more unsubstantiated witness testimony from Metodo3. The PJ must have wasted hours of valuable time following up this sort of rubbish passed to them from the McCann's detectives.
One does wonder whether it was calculated misdirection or merely incompetence.
Yeah, probably went in Paiva's "IRRELEVANT BIN"
-
I can't really see what all the fuss is about. If my child was missing, and there was a chance of finding her, but was against the law of the country, would I take that chance?
Too right I would. In a heartbeat.
As would any parent.
-
I can't really see what all the fuss is about. If my child was missing, and there was a chance of finding her, but was against the law of the country, would I take that chance?
Too right I would. In a heartbeat.
As would any parent.
....and answer questions and perform reconstructions.
-
....and answer questions and perform reconstructions.
Yes they do rather pick and choose what they are willing to do 'for their child'.
-
It is a warped mindset indeed that supposes that answering those questions or performing a "reconstitution" would have done anything whatever for Madeleine ...
-
It is a warped mindset indeed that supposes that answering those questions or performing a "reconstitution" would have done anything whatever for Madeleine ...
It certainly is, and around the houses we go with the sceptics claiming that they would do absolutely anything to find their chid (including fully cooperate with a police investigation with one aim only and that is to get you put in the dock and ultimately in prison), but heaven forfend they should break sacred Portuguese law by hiring detectives to find that child!
-
Of course, but then that's because you're thinking like a normal parent, not a McCann sceptic. In any case, this thread alleges that Kate McCann admits to breaking the law, when in fact she does no such thing. So, not only is this thread title inaccurate, it is also libellous, but still it is allowed to remain - why I wonder?
Absolute rubbish. Kate McCann knew damn well that any investigation of a crime committed in Portugal in direct opposition to the official police investigation was liable to be considered illegal, technically or otherwise. Their Fund engaged these crooked investigators knowing full well what they were doing was contrary to Portuguese law. There is no excuse for what they did, they went into it with their eyes open. So you libel claim is a load of cobblers!!
-
Absolute rubbish. Kate McCann knew damn well that any investigation of a crime committed in Portugal in direct opposition to the official police investigation was liable to be considered illegal, technically or otherwise. Their Fund engaged these crooked investigators knowing full well what they were doing was contrary to Portuguese law. There is no excuse for what they did, they went into it with their eyes open. So you libel claim is a load of cobblers!!
Angelo. Where the law is an ass, do you feel duty bound to follow it slavishly?
-
Absolute rubbish. Kate McCann knew damn well that any investigation of a crime committed in Portugal in direct opposition to the official police investigation was liable to be considered illegal, technically or otherwise. Their Fund engaged these crooked investigators knowing full well what they were doing was contrary to Portuguese law. There is no excuse for what they did, they went into it with their eyes open. So you libel claim is a load of cobblers!!
You have encapsulated the facts rather well Angelo. The important point which must not be forgotten in this topic is that the McCanns had been advised that interference in the criminal inquiry was illegal thus why Kate McCann states in her book the reason for using a Spanish firm of private investigators. Did Kate McCann really think that Metodo 3 were going to be doing all their investigating in every country except the one in which the alleged crime took place?
-
According to Angelo there is no excuse for hiring PIs to look for your child - no matter that you feel the police are only interested in getting YOU prosecuted and are not actively looking for either your child or the actual perpetrator. So, there we have it - abiding by Portuguese Law is more important to Angelo than the welfare of his own offspring. Shocking!
-
Simple question: did Kate McCann admit to breaking Portuguese Law in her book?
Simple answer: No she didn't.
End of.
You are completely wrong and your failure to see that undermines your credibility.
Lets put it another way. Why did Kate McCann admit in her book that they employed a Spanish PI instead of a Portuguese one? Have you worked it out yet?
-
You are completely wrong and your failure to see that undermines your credibility.
Lets put it another way. Why did Kate McCann admit in her book that they employed a Spanish PI instead of a Portuguese one? Have you worked it out yet?
Because she didn't want to break Portuguese Law?
Do I win a prize?
-
According to Angelo there is no excuse for hiring PIs to look for your child - no matter that you feel the police are only interested in getting YOU prosecuted and are not actively looking for either your child or the actual perpetrator. So, there we have it - abiding by Portuguese Law is more important to Angelo than the welfare of his own offspring. Shocking!
If the police came to one conclusion and one conclusion only (according to you) then they must have deemed the parents to be hiding something. Failure to cooperate fully with the police and refusing to answer some very basic questions was the most stupid thing Kate McCann ever did as far as the police investigation was concerned. Appears her lawyer had concerns too at that stage.
-
Because she didn't want to break Portuguese Law?
Do I win a prize?
No you fail because their agents broke the law regardless. They operated in Portugal and the McCanns knew they were operating there thus they are as guilty as their agents. The McCanns knew what they were doing was, to use Kate's words, 'technically illegal'. I can see why she raised this point in her book since it was an attempt to head off criticism. Bottom line is the McCanns like to use the Law when it suits them but can't accept that they too have engaged in illegal activities.
-
No you fail because their agents broke the law regardless. They operated in Portugal and the McCanns knew they were operating there thus they are as guilty as their agents. The McCanns knew what they were doing was, to use Kate's words, 'technically illegal'. I can see why she raised this point in her book since it was an attempt to head off criticism. Bottom line is the McCanns like to use the Law when it suits them but can't accept that they too have engaged in illegal activities.
mccanns hired M3 in spain...mccanns are not responsible for what M3 did...no contract can enforce an illegal act....if M3 acted illegally the contract with the mccanns would be void and the mccanns not responsible...check out contract law
-
Angelo. Where the law is an ass, do you feel duty bound to follow it slavishly?
I know let's all obey the laws we wish to and not obey the ones we find inconvenient. What a jolly good idea sir.
It works well to a point; your "line" may be at speeding mine may be at murder. I am sure you can now see the ultimate flaw in your argument.
-
You really have missed the point haven't you Alfred. It made no difference where the PI's came from, the point is that all interference in the criminal inquiry was illegal and they knew it. They created a situation which they knew to be illegal which renders them guilty of a crime under Portuguese Law.
-
You really have missed the point haven't you Alfred. It made no difference where the PI's came from, the point is that all interference in the criminal inquiry was illegal and they knew it. They created a situation which they knew to be illegal which renders them guilty of a crime under Portuguese Law.
How far does Portugal's jurisdiction extend?
-
Angelo. Where the law is an ass, do you feel duty bound to follow it slavishly?
Portuguese Law is not an ass since there are very good reasons for not having a bunch of Metodo or Oakley cowboys running around stirring up witnesses and scaring them off. I would just love to see what the Met would do if private investigators started interfering in the next murder to come their way. Its time some people woke up frankly!!
-
I know let's all obey the laws we wish to and not obey the ones we find inconvenient. What a jolly good idea sir.
It works well to a point; your "line" may be at speeding mine may be at murder. I am sure you can now see the ultimate flaw in your argument.
?? Sorry, I have trouble understanding this post.
-
Portuguese Law is not an ass since there are very good reasons for not having a bunch of Metodo or Oakley cowboys running around stirring up witnesses and scaring them off. I would just love to see what the Met would do if private investigators started interfering in the next murder to come their way. Its time some people woke up frankly!!
Have you established in which way Metodo3 interfered in the police investigation?
-
mccanns hired M3 in spain...mccanns are not responsible for what M3 did...no contract can enforce an illegal act....if M3 acted illegally the contract with the mccanns would be void and the mccanns not responsible...check out contract law
It would all depend on what you meant by...as professor Job would have said.
Perusing the following links,good sir, may aid you to a better understanding. By perusing I mean of course reading all of it including all the links within the links rather that merely reading far enough to find a statement you like.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_agreement.
http://www.inhouselawyer.co.uk/index.php/contract/10071-illegality-in-contracts.
It would however be an interesting case to bring to court as it has the potential to last even longer than the McCann vs Amaral libel trial.
-
Portuguese Law is not an ass since there are very good reasons for not having a bunch of Metodo or Oakley cowboys running around stirring up witnesses and scaring them off. I would just love to see what the Met would do if private investigators started interfering in the next murder to come their way. Its time some people woke up frankly!!
Perhaps you need to wake up....the pj were not doing any investigating...the only suspects were the parents
-
?? Sorry, I have trouble understanding this post.
It should not be too difficult. It is based on the premise that the law is there to be followed not cherry picked at. My experience is that the cherry pickers are the first to call their mummy when it goes horribly wrong.
Jean Pierre suggested that we should not slavishly follow the law if we believe it to be an ass. That rather suggests he wishes to cherry pick the laws that should be obeyed in his opinion. That way lies anarchy my friend.
But my point is once you have made the conscious decision to observe only laws that suit your convenience where will you draw the line at your law breaking?
-
If the police came to one conclusion and one conclusion only (according to you) then they must have deemed the parents to be hiding something. Failure to cooperate fully with the police and refusing to answer some very basic questions was the most stupid thing Kate McCann ever did as far as the police investigation was concerned. Appears her lawyer had concerns too at that stage.
Perhaps you can explain to us how answering any number of questions a thousand times over would have convinced the PJ that Kate was wholly innocent of the crimes they suspected her of? What could she have said to convince them, eh? In your experience, here as Moderator of the UK Justice Forum, have you ever encountered another case in which the police concluded (wrongly) that they had their man or woman and then charged them for a crime they did not commit? Just wondering like...
-
You are completely wrong and your failure to see that undermines your credibility.
Lets put it another way. Why did Kate McCann admit in her book that they employed a Spanish PI instead of a Portuguese one? Have you worked it out yet?
Actually my reading of it is that the Drs McCann did not hire M3 ... brian Kennedy did ... and this has already been pointed out by another poster on this thread.
-
Interestingly Mathew Wyse who started this thread chose not to include the following line in his quoted paragraph from Kate's book "M3 also had links to the Spanish police, who, in turn, had good connections with the Portuguese police". Another good reason for choosing them as PIs whilst at the same time not treading on the PJ's toes.
-
It should not be too difficult. It is based on the premise that the law is there to be followed not cherry picked at. My experience is that the cherry pickers are the first to call their mummy when it goes horribly wrong.
Jean Pierre suggested that we should not slavishly follow the law if we believe it to be an ass. That rather suggests he wishes to cherry pick the laws that should be obeyed in his opinion. That way lies anarchy my friend.
But my point is once you have made the conscious decision to observe only laws that suit your convenience where will you draw the line at your law breaking?
if authorities want laws to be followed they should be enforced....the PJ actually worked with M3....does that suggest to you they broke the law
-
The PJ didn’t seem too concerned about the involvement of M3 in Madeleine’s case … the fact that they met with them and received information from them concerning the case … suggests that within the set parameters there was no illegality involved.
So they were well aware of the involvement of Private Investigators ... they may not have been ecstatically happy about it ... but, as can be seen from the files, they actually carried out an investigation of part of the information given to them by M3.
Volume XIII Pages 3434 - 3436
Service Information 2007.11.14
To: Coordinator of the Criminal Investigation
From: Joao Carlos, Inspector
Concerning the investigation of the disappearance of the British minor, Madeleine McCann, I present you Sir with the following:
On the 19th of October, we were contacted by the Commissary General, located in Madrid, by the Chief of the Kidnapping Unit, Alberto Carbas, who passed to us the information that the McCann family had contracted a Spanish company known as 'METODO 3', composed of Spanish private detectives. This business, or in other words, the costs of the activities of this business were being covered by a Scottish multi-millionaire whose name is BRIAN KENNEDY and whose objective was to locate the British minor.
With this information, we were asked if we were available and interested in meeting with a representative of this Spanish business, and also with the Commissary General and Chief of the Kidnapping Unit of the Police of our neighbouring country, whose operation is in Madrid.
The meeting had as its objective to receive on behalf of the private detectives, from that moment and for their own wishes, relevant information with the aim to ascertain the truth, and to state that they would not interfere in police work, and at most they would serve as a complement to some useful information. They firmly state that they are not working directly for the McCann family, but for Brian Kennedy and that their sole purpose is to locate the missing child, or to gather the inescapable truth of what happened.
They did not ask for any information regarding the investigation, nor was any offered to them, for obvious reasons as this is found incorporated in the Portuguese penal process.
On the 13th of the current year, in the presence of the signatory and inspectors Paulo Ferreira and Ricardo Paiva, a meeting was held, in this department, with Brian Kennedy, the director of the detective company, Francisco Marco and an advisor of this same company, Antonio Jimenez, ex-chief of the Kidnapping Unit of Catalan. From the beginning, Brian Kennedy was questioned, and ascertained that the meeting only had this scope--of transmitting that his objective in all of this was purely charitable in that he is interested [in helping to stop] the bad treatment of minors and in missing children. He affirmed that he only was interested in discovering the truth and nothing more even if the McCann family, the friends, or any other person is found to be involved in the disappearance.
During the course of this meeting, the director of METODO 3 gave us a small book (attached), with information relative to the disappearance of the minor. This information, as we were told, was received via telephone and that they had already opened a line in Spain, specifically to receive and deal with information.
In this book, written in Spanish, we can analyse three pieces of information:
1. In the first case, we observed that there was report of facts which occurred in August/September of 2006, and which appears to us somewhat extemporaneous, as it cannot now be related to the material under investigation.
2. In the second point, we should remember that the computers of Sergey Malinka were searched and that nothing of suspicion was found there or related to paedophilia.
3. In that which concerns the third point, we are currently carrying out diligences with the intent to confirm or disprove the related information.
With nothing more to report.
Joao Carlos, Inspector
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/BRIAN-KENNEDY.htm
Is this being ignored?
-
if authorities want laws to be followed they should be enforced....the PJ actually worked with M3....does that suggest to you they broke the law
The PJ of course repeatedly broke the Judicial Secrecy law but we don't see sceptics hollering in outrage about that!
-
You are completely wrong and your failure to see that undermines your credibility.
Lets put it another way. Why did Kate McCann admit in her book that they employed a Spanish PI instead of a Portuguese one? Have you worked it out yet?
Have you worked out why Kate did not employ a Portuguese PI....I certainly have and it is not because a Portuguese PI investigating would be breaking the law
-
The PJ didn’t seem too concerned about the involvement of M3 in Madeleine’s case … the fact that they met with them and received information from them concerning the case … suggests that within the set parameters there was no illegality involved.
So they were well aware of the involvement of Private Investigators ... they may not have been ecstatically happy about it ... but, as can be seen from the files, they actually carried out an investigation of part of the information given to them by M3.
Volume XIII Pages 3434 - 3436
Service Information 2007.11.14
To: Coordinator of the Criminal Investigation
From: Joao Carlos, Inspector
Concerning the investigation of the disappearance of the British minor, Madeleine McCann, I present you Sir with the following:
On the 19th of October, we were contacted by the Commissary General, located in Madrid, by the Chief of the Kidnapping Unit, Alberto Carbas, who passed to us the information that the McCann family had contracted a Spanish company known as 'METODO 3', composed of Spanish private detectives. This business, or in other words, the costs of the activities of this business were being covered by a Scottish multi-millionaire whose name is BRIAN KENNEDY and whose objective was to locate the British minor.
With this information, we were asked if we were available and interested in meeting with a representative of this Spanish business, and also with the Commissary General and Chief of the Kidnapping Unit of the Police of our neighbouring country, whose operation is in Madrid.
The meeting had as its objective to receive on behalf of the private detectives, from that moment and for their own wishes, relevant information with the aim to ascertain the truth, and to state that they would not interfere in police work, and at most they would serve as a complement to some useful information. They firmly state that they are not working directly for the McCann family, but for Brian Kennedy and that their sole purpose is to locate the missing child, or to gather the inescapable truth of what happened.
They did not ask for any information regarding the investigation, nor was any offered to them, for obvious reasons as this is found incorporated in the Portuguese penal process.
On the 13th of the current year, in the presence of the signatory and inspectors Paulo Ferreira and Ricardo Paiva, a meeting was held, in this department, with Brian Kennedy, the director of the detective company, Francisco Marco and an advisor of this same company, Antonio Jimenez, ex-chief of the Kidnapping Unit of Catalan. From the beginning, Brian Kennedy was questioned, and ascertained that the meeting only had this scope--of transmitting that his objective in all of this was purely charitable in that he is interested [in helping to stop] the bad treatment of minors and in missing children. He affirmed that he only was interested in discovering the truth and nothing more even if the McCann family, the friends, or any other person is found to be involved in the disappearance.
During the course of this meeting, the director of METODO 3 gave us a small book (attached), with information relative to the disappearance of the minor. This information, as we were told, was received via telephone and that they had already opened a line in Spain, specifically to receive and deal with information.
In this book, written in Spanish, we can analyse three pieces of information:
1. In the first case, we observed that there was report of facts which occurred in August/September of 2006, and which appears to us somewhat extemporaneous, as it cannot now be related to the material under investigation.
2. In the second point, we should remember that the computers of Sergey Malinka were searched and that nothing of suspicion was found there or related to paedophilia.
3. In that which concerns the third point, we are currently carrying out diligences with the intent to confirm or disprove the related information.
With nothing more to report.
Joao Carlos, Inspector
Is this being ignored?
It has been acknowledged, mainly by those of us interested in the truth.
But ignored by those interested in something else ...
All ways up, the definitive end to the "debate" ...
-
Is this being ignored?
Oh no! O Lady High Moderator it is not being ignored.
There was a contract between Metodo3 of the first part and who knows whom of second part. That much we think we know my dear.
The Party of Second Part may have been Brian Kennedy, it may have been Leaving No Stone Unturned Ltd or it may have been Drs McCann.
The last option is a trifle silly so can I would venture be discounted, however without the contract document in our grubby little fists we remain at sixes and sevens as to how the contract was formed.
Perhaps we should be debating "Party of The First Part" and "Party of The Second Part"?
It would satisfy Alfred's libel obsession, apart from that it wouldn't be much fun because no "names" would receive a bashing.
Rather similar to betting on nameless horses I feel.
-
Oh no! O Lady High Moderator it is not being ignored.
There was a contract between Metodo3 of the first part and who knows whom of second part. That much we think we know my dear.
The Party of Second Part may have been Brian Kennedy, it may have been Leaving No Stone Unturned Ltd or it may have been Drs McCann.
The last option is a trifle silly so can I would venture be discounted, however without the contract document in our grubby little fists we remain at sixes and sevens as to how the contract was formed.
Perhaps we should be debating "Party of The First Part" and "Party of The Second Part"?
It would satisfy Alfred's libel obsession, apart from that it wouldn't be much fun because no "names" would receive a bashing.
Rather similar to betting on nameless horses I feel.
Is obfuscation allowed by the rules of this forum?
-
Oh no! O Lady High Moderator it is not being ignored.
There was a contract between Metodo3 of the first part and who knows whom of second part. That much we think we know my dear.
The Party of Second Part may have been Brian Kennedy, it may have been Leaving No Stone Unturned Ltd or it may have been Drs McCann.
The last option is a trifle silly so can I would venture be discounted, however without the contract document in our grubby little fists we remain at sixes and sevens as to how the contract was formed.
Perhaps we should be debating "Party of The First Part" and "Party of The Second Part"?
It would satisfy Alfred's libel obsession, apart from that it wouldn't be much fun because no "names" would receive a bashing.
Rather similar to betting on nameless horses I feel.
Is that an admission that bashing "names" is fun? I do believe it is!
-
It is also worth reproducing extracts which appeared in Chapter 9 prior to the paragraph which started this particular thread.
Ch 19 - ACTION ON THREE FRONTS
By October, with the battle to clear our names under way, we were able to concentrate properly on our top priority: finding Madeleine. Since the very beginning, various friends had proposed hiring private investigators. So far, beyond following up the odd piece of information outside Portugal, we had not gone down this road. Apart from the legal complications and the potential for interference with the official investigation, we had been reassured that, after a shaky start, the police were doing everything that could be done.
The McCanns were well aware of the legal complications and the potential for interference with the official investigation but were quite content to let the Portuguese get on with it. That was of course until the focus of the investigation changed and they found themselves under scrutiny.
Until the summer, we had believed that our best hope of Madeleine being found lay with the police. We needed to believe that. However, as the months rolled by, our faith in them had rapidly declined, hitting rock-bottom in August. Once we were declared arguidos, it became frighteningly clear to us that they were no longer looking for Madeleine. What they were looking for now, it seemed, was a conviction. Feeling more desperate for Madeleine now than at any time since that first night, we had no option but to launch our own investigation.
Some might say that they did indeed have another option and that was to cooperate fully with the Portuguese investigation. Acting in the way they did on being designated arguidos only merely sought to raise the police's suspicions even more. Fleeing the scene could not have done more damage to their credibility in the eyes of many onlookers.
Our first investigators, the Spanish company Método 3, began working for us in October. With private investigations technically illegal in Portugal, we felt the closest we could get would be a firm from somewhere on the Iberian Peninsula, which would have the advantage of familiarity with local systems, culture and geography and the best network of contacts in the region.
The phrase 'closest we could get' is somewhat ambiguous given the involvement between Método 3, lawyer João Grade and the Arade dam fiasco which all occurred in Portugal. If the McCanns had set out to circumvent Portuguese Law by engaging a Spanish firm of private investigators then they summarily failed. What initially might have been deemed 'technically illegal' later became 'illegal' since Método 3 took their investigation to Portuguese soil and right under and up the noses of the Portuguese police.
The argument which will no doubt be rolled out now is that the McCanns were a) not to know that M3 were operating on Portuguese soil and b) were not to know what M3 were up to. Both arguments fall at the first fence because it is up to the person or persons who employ private investigators to ensure that they are tasked in accordance with the law prevailing in each country and that they operate in accordance with those laws. M3 would not have taken their investigation to Portugal without the express authority of their clients who were after all paying handsomely for their services. In fact, a bit further into Ch 19 Kate writes the following about M3.
We have no doubt that M3 made significant strides, but unfortunately, in mid-December, one of their senior investigators gave an overly optimistic interview to the media. He implied that the team were close to finding Madeleine and declared that he hoped she would be home by Christmas. Gerry and I did not pay much heed to these bullish assertions. While we believed they’d been made in an attempt to cast the search in a positive light, we knew that such public declarations would not be helpful. Credibility is so important. That glitch apart, M3 worked very hard for us and, just for the record, their fees were very low: most of the money they were paid was for verified expenses. Although we went on to employ new teams, we maintain good relations with M3 today.
-
Is obfuscation allowed by the rules of this forum?
So my dear you know for sure the names of the parties to the contract?
Please tell us.
-
It should not be too difficult. It is based on the premise that the law is there to be followed not cherry picked at. My experience is that the cherry pickers are the first to call their mummy when it goes horribly wrong.
Jean Pierre suggested that we should not slavishly follow the law if we believe it to be an ass. That rather suggests he wishes to cherry pick the laws that should be obeyed in his opinion. That way lies anarchy my friend.
But my point is once you have made the conscious decision to observe only laws that suit your convenience where will you draw the line at your law breaking?
"Jean Pierre suggested that we should not slavishly follow the law if we believe it to be an ass. That rather suggests he wishes to cherry pick the laws that should be obeyed in his opinion. That way lies anarchy my friend. "
Where did Jean-Pierre suggest that?
But my point is once you have made the conscious decision to observe only laws that suit your convenience where will you draw the line at your law breaking?
Who are you referring to?
-
It is also worth reproducing extracts which appeared in Chapter 9 prior to the paragraph which started this particular thread.
The McCanns were well aware of the legal complications and the potential for interference with the official investigation but were quite content to let the Portuguese get on with it. That was of course until the focus of the investigation changed and they found themselves under scrutiny.
Some might say that they did indeed have another option and that was to cooperate fully with the Portuguese investigation. Acting in the way they did on being designated arguidos only merely sought to raise the police's suspicions even more. Fleeing the scene could not have done more damage to their credibility in the eyes of many onlookers.
The phrase 'closest we could get' is somewhat ambiguous given the involvement between Método 3, lawyer João Grade and the Arade dam fiasco which all occurred in Portugal. If the McCanns had set out to circumvent Portuguese Law by engaging a Spanish then they summarily failed. What initially might have been deemed 'technically illegal' later became 'illegal' since Método 3 took their investigation to Portuguese soil and right under and up the noses of the Portuguese police.
If it was illegal, can you please tell us why the PJ cooperated with them instead of arresting them?
-
"Jean Pierre suggested that we should not slavishly follow the law if we believe it to be an ass. That rather suggests he wishes to cherry pick the laws that should be obeyed in his opinion. That way lies anarchy my friend. "
Where did Jean-Pierre suggest that?
But my point is once you have made the conscious decision to observe only laws that suit your convenience where will you draw the line at your law breaking?
Who are you referring to?
No one, I was stating a principle "All laws are meant to be observed not cherry picked at". Or do you find that notion disagreeable?
Jean-Pierre in a response to Angelo up the thread a bit my dear.
-
If it was illegal, can you please tell us why the PJ cooperated with them instead of arresting them?
One would have to ask the PJ that question. My own view is that they were tolerated to begin with until it became very clear that Amaral was their target.
-
One would have to ask the PJ that question. My own view is that they were tolerated to begin with until it became very clear that Amaral was their target.
Not sure what you mean by that.
-
I find the actions of the McCann incredulous. There is a Chapter in Kate's book called 'The Fightback Begins' which infers a them and us scenario. All they had to do was to cooperate with the police and answer a few lousy questions. Their arrogance astounds!
-
Not sure what you mean by that.
I suggest you read up on João (John) Grade and Método 3.
Extract from SIC magazine
15 February 2009
Leonor Cipriano was defended during the entire PJ torture investigation by the lawyer João Grade dos Santos but, "on the eve of the start of trial, the client waived the services of the lawyer,"
Acting on behalf of the McCanns, Método 3, tried to recruit Leonor Cipriano's lawyer, João Grade dos Santos, explaining that his help would be very helpful to their investigations, given the similarities between the two cases. Método 3 stated that "spending money was no problem" and pulled the fore the theme "Gonçalo Amaral". Only months later, having already refused to work for the Spanish agency, Grade realized that Método 3 had their own "agenda". This "agenda" was, according to SIC, to get a lawyer to put Gonçalo Amaral "out of operation", since, in both cases, the detective seemed to want the same: the culpability of the parents.
Faced with the refusal of João Grade dos Santos, Método 3 approached another lawyer - the young Marcos Aragão Correia, who came to participate in searches of Madeleine as a medium and subsequently became involved in investigations related to the Joana case, eventually being engaged to defend Leonor Cipriano in the trial against the five inspectors from Faro.
Read it for yourself here. (http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=pt&u=http://www.publico.pt/sociedade/noticia/agencia-de-detectives-que-procurou-maddie-recrutou-advogado-para-queimar-goncalo-amaral-no-caso-joana-cipriano-1365298&prev=/search%3Fq%3Djo%25C3%25A3o%2Bgrade%2Bdos%2Bsantos%26client%3Dms-opera-mobile%26channel%3Dnew)
www.miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=3500.msg133640#msg133640
-
I find the actions of the McCann incredulous. There is a Chapter in Kate's book called 'The Fightback Begins' which infers a them and us scenario. All they had to do was to cooperate with the police and answer a few lousy questions. Their arrogance astounds!
Of course it was an us and them scenario, how else would you describe it?! The police think you're guilty and you know you're not. Are you on their side??!
-
I find the actions of the McCann incredulous. There is a Chapter in Kate's book called 'The Fightback Begins' which infers a them and us scenario. All they had to do was to cooperate with the police and answer a few lousy questions. Their arrogance astounds!
Was it a war novel?
It would not have been reasonable to cooperate with the authorities because according to many experts on this forum "the authorities would fit them up".
They had to effect a tactical withdrawal (aka runaway) to save themselves for "The Fightback". Like Dunkirk and Normandy but without the guns and fighting and death and stuff.
-
Of course it was an us and them scenario, how else would you describe it?! The police think you're guilty and you know you're not. Are you on their side??!
All they had to do was to tell the truth and sit tight but not them. They even considered fleeing to Spain so you tell me??? I won't even mention the conspiracy to thwart the reconstruction.
-
Was it a war novel?
It would not have been reasonable to cooperate with the authorities because according to many experts on this forum "the authorities would fit them up".
They had to effect a tactical withdrawal (aka runaway) to save themselves for "The Fightback". Like Dunkirk and Normandy but without the guns and fighting and death and stuff.
I've never heard of the parents of a disappeared child behaving in such a manner, it's unprecedented so no prizes to Alfred and no prizes for guessing why they did it.
-
I suggest you read up on João (John) Grade and Método 3.
Extract from SIC magazine
15 February 2009
Leonor Cipriano was defended during the entire PJ torture investigation by the lawyer João Grade dos Santos but, "on the eve of the start of trial, the client waived the services of the lawyer,"
Acting on behalf of the McCanns, Método 3, tried to recruit Leonor Cipriano's lawyer, João Grade dos Santos, explaining that his help would be very helpful to their investigations, given the similarities between the two cases. Método 3 stated that "spending money was no problem" and pulled the fore the theme "Gonçalo Amaral". Only months later, having already refused to work for the Spanish agency, Grade realized that Método 3 had their own "agenda". This "agenda" was, according to SIC, to get a lawyer to put Gonçalo Amaral "out of operation", since, in both cases, the detective seemed to want the same: the culpability of the parents.
Faced with the refusal of João Grade dos Santos, Método 3 approached another lawyer - the young Marcos Aragão Correia, who came to participate in searches of Madeleine as a medium and subsequently became involved in investigations related to the Joana case, eventually being engaged to defend Leonor Cipriano in the trial against the five inspectors from Faro.
Read it for yourself here. (http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=pt&u=http://www.publico.pt/sociedade/noticia/agencia-de-detectives-que-procurou-maddie-recrutou-advogado-para-queimar-goncalo-amaral-no-caso-joana-cipriano-1365298&prev=/search%3Fq%3Djo%25C3%25A3o%2Bgrade%2Bdos%2Bsantos%26client%3Dms-opera-mobile%26channel%3Dnew)
www.miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=3500.msg133640#msg133640
LOL John. That sounds like rather a lot of spin to me. Who was the source for this SIC report?
-
Given all their expert advisers, I don't believe they were in the least bewildered.
-
All they had to do was to tell the truth and sit tight but not them. They even considered fleeing to Spain so you tell me??? I won't even mention the conspiracy to thwart the reconstruction.
So, all they had to do was tell the truth and all would have been well would it? How naive. I guess in your world view no one who is innocent ever gets wrongly charged with a crime.
-
So, all they had to do was tell the truth and all would have been well would it? How naive. I guess in your world view no one who is innocent ever gets wrongly charged with a crime.
It doesn't matter if they get charged. A problem only arises if they are wrongfully convicted.
-
It doesn't matter if they get charged. A problem only arises if they are wrongfully convicted.
This is madness. How long would it have been between being charged and a verdict in court? Meanwhile are the police going to be looking for the actual perpetrator and your daughter?n Please be reasonable.
-
LOL John. That sounds like rather a lot of spin to me. Who was the source for this SIC report?
We can leave the spin to Clarrie and since SIC has not been sued by M3 we know where the truth lies.
-
This is madness. How long would it have been between being charged and a verdict in court? Meanwhile are the police going to be looking for the actual perpetrator and your daughter?n Please be reasonable.
There was no proof of their involvement once forensics failed to support the long heralded dog alerts. They should have faced it out rather than bolting. Did the British police have it in for them too?
-
This is madness. How long would it have been between being charged and a verdict in court? Meanwhile are the police going to be looking for the actual perpetrator and your daughter?n Please be reasonable.
Lots of people get charged, go to trial and are subsequently acquitted. Its called justice.
-
I find the actions of the McCann incredulous. There is a Chapter in Kate's book called 'The Fightback Begins' which infers a them and us scenario. All they had to do was to cooperate with the police and answer a few lousy questions. Their arrogance astounds!
I find the actions of the McCanns quite reasonable..they realised they were dealing with a third rate police force...the PJ were only interested in finding grounds to arrest the McCanns ...they didn't have any...
Don't you find it incredible that they have had to accept SY now investigate the case...that can only mean that there own investigation was pitiful
-
Lots of people get charged, go to trial and are subsequently acquitted. Its called justice.
in Portugal they could have faced a year held in custody on remand.. its called injustice...any one with any sense would have got away asap...they had already seen how amaral had misunderstood the evidence
-
There was no proof of their involvement once forensics failed to support the long heralded dog alerts. They should have faced it out rather than bolting. Did the British police have it in for them too?
The McCanns were told that by the PJ that the forensics proved Madeleine died in the apartment. Is it any wonder they felt they were being stitched up?!
-
No you fail because their agents broke the law regardless. They operated in Portugal and the McCanns knew they were operating there thus they are as guilty as their agents. The McCanns knew what they were doing was, to use Kate's words, 'technically illegal'. I can see why she raised this point in her book since it was an attempt to head off criticism. Bottom line is the McCanns like to use the Law when it suits them but can't accept that they too have engaged in illegal activities.
How would you have handled it then Angelo, had you been made an arguido for a crime you KNEW you hadn't committed? And also told lies about the cadaver odour of your child being in the hire car you hired several weeks later.
How would you have handled the search for your child if YOU knew that there was a good chance she was still alive and the Police had stopped looking altogether?
Would you just abandon her?
-
There was no proof of their involvement once forensics failed to support the long heralded dog alerts. They should have faced it out rather than bolting. Did the British police have it in for them too?
perhaps everyone on this forum should remember this
-
Lots of people get charged, go to trial and are subsequently acquitted. Its called justice.
So it wouldn't be a problem for you if you were charged with concealing the death of your own child, despite the fact you didn't do it?
-
The McCanns were told that by the PJ that the forensics proved Madeleine died in the apartment. Is it any wonder they felt they were being stitched up?!
Innocent people have one huge advantage over the police and that is that they know the truth. The McCanns had nothing to fear from their arguido status, it wasn't as if they had been arrested and charged was it?
-
Lots of people get charged, go to trial and are subsequently acquitted. Its called justice.
Do you not understand the point I made about who would be looking for Madeleine in the interim between being charged and aquitted? It could have taken years!
-
Could we keep on topic please. Do keep in mind that off topic posts cannot always be moved to a relevant thread and so are usually removed.
-
I find the actions of the McCann incredulous. There is a Chapter in Kate's book called 'The Fightback Begins' which infers a them and us scenario. All they had to do was to cooperate with the police and answer a few lousy questions. Their arrogance astounds!
So your advice to any individual who is being interviewed by the police as a suspect … would be to ignore the advice of their lawyer and answer 'a few lousy questions' which have been framed to allow them to incriminate themselves.
Taking such co-operation to it's logical conclusion in Madeleine's case ... a theory had been formulated ... so why not just "confess" to fit the theory.
Then we would have hit another 'lousy question' ... which would have followed the line of ... "WHAT DID YOU DO WITH THE BODY??"
A difficult one that ... ask Leonore Cipriano.
-
Innocent people have one huge advantage over the police and that is that they know the truth. The McCanns had nothing to fear from their arguido status, it wasn't as if they had been arrested and charged was it?
So, you accept that the McCanns are innocent do you?
-
Innocent people have one huge advantage over the police and that is that they know the truth. The McCanns had nothing to fear from their arguido status, it wasn't as if they had been arrested and charged was it?
innocent people get charged...held in custody ...convicted and jailed all the time.. I think even though they were innocent the mcccans had a lot to fear
-
innocent people get charged...held in custody ...convicted and jailed all the time.. I think even though they were innocent the mcccans had a lot to fear
They were badly advised. Obviously their lawyer was concerned that they would implicate themselves in something thus the no comment tactics.
-
So, you accept that the McCanns are innocent do you?
Innocent of what? As far as the thread theme is concerned its guilty all the way technically or otherwise.
-
So your advice to any individual who is being interviewed by the police as a suspect … would be to ignore the advice of their lawyer and answer 'a few lousy questions' which have been framed to allow them to incriminate themselves.
Taking such co-operation to it's logical conclusion in Madeleine's case ... a theory had been formulated ... so why not just "confess" to fit the theory.
Then we would have hit another 'lousy question' ... which would have followed the line of ... "WHAT DID YOU DO WITH THE BODY??"
A difficult one that ... ask Leonore Cipriano.
I don't suppose they would have had to worry about what they did with the body. Amaral would have told them that.
-
So your advice to any individual who is being interviewed by the police as a suspect … would be to ignore the advice of their lawyer and answer 'a few lousy questions' which have been framed to allow them to incriminate themselves.
Taking such co-operation to it's logical conclusion in Madeleine's case ... a theory had been formulated ... so why not just "confess" to fit the theory.
Then we would have hit another 'lousy question' ... which would have followed the line of ... "WHAT DID YOU DO WITH THE BODY??"
A difficult one that ... ask Leonore Cipriano.
Quite.
-
I don't suppose they would have had to worry about what they did with the body. Amaral would have told them that.
@)(++(* 8@??)(
I love your dry humour Eleanor.
-
This is madness. How long would it have been between being charged and a verdict in court? Meanwhile are the police going to be looking for the actual perpetrator and your daughter?n Please be reasonable.
Agreed.
It matters when innocent people are wrongly accused -- however strong the basis for the false accusation (and where the McCanns are concerned, the basis was weak).
-
I think the investigators would be where the suspects were...that's why SY are on Portugal...questioning suspects with the help of rogatory letters...
Suspects, persons of interest or witnesses?
Perseverance with the investigation has been not inconsiderable in time and endeavour of the proletariat.
Remind me sir how many people have thus far been charged with an offence resultant from all this toil?
Although I would concur, sir, the logical place to carry out the work is where the events took place and where the weightier portion of the papers are archived. Where the guilty reside is yet to be determined. Spain, Portugal, Holland, Australia, United Kingdom and any one of the Scandinavian countries all have been mooted as possible. A veritable United Nations assortment. Actually it is yet to be determined what happened, I don't recall the British or Portuguese authorities broadcasting that do you? Other than several possibilities of "lines of inquiry"
One hopes it will all be resolved adequately e'er long.
-
I have not seen any statement where Kate admits to illegal activities. Only posters putting their own spin on what she says
-
I have not seen any statement where Kate admits to illegal activities. Only posters putting their own spin on what she says
It really is very simple. Kate McCann states in her book of thoughts that private investigators were technically illegal in Portugal but then what had the McCanns already done? They employed private investigators to work in Portugal.
-
It really is very simple. Kate McCann states in her book of thoughts that private investigators were technically illegal in Portugal but then what had the McCanns already done? They employed private investigators to work in Portugal.
......and that is precisely the point.
-
It really is very simple. Kate McCann states in her book of thoughts that private investigators were technically illegal in Portugal but then what had the McCanns already done? They employed private investigators to work in Portugal.
It was private investigations that were illegal in Portugal ...check the opening post....so they employed a Spanish company...that is not illegal...what that company did was its own responsibility...not the mccanns...
it seems that the PJ were quite happy with M3 so that would indicate that they had not broken any laws
-
Members are reminded to attack the posts (where appropriate) and not each other. Personal attacks are both contrary to forum rules and off topic. Members who breach this code of conduct today will be suspended for 24 hours. Please treat this as a final warning.
-
It really is very simple. Kate McCann states in her book of thoughts that private investigators were technically illegal in Portugal but then what had the McCanns already done? They employed private investigators to work in Portugal.
They could not have a contract to carry out an illegal act
-
It was private investigations that were illegal in Portugal ...check the opening post....so they employed a Spanish company...that is not illegal...what that company did was its own responsibility...not the mccanns...
it seems that the PJ were quite happy with M3 so that would indicate that they had not broken any laws
"...was its own responsibility"!! Soooo davel you are expecting us to believe the McCanns didn't know what M3 were up to in Portugal and being paid handsomely for the privilege? That my friend is a claim too far even for you. @)(++(*
At least you have now admitted that M3 were acting illegally, that must be a lightbulb moment.
-
They could not have a contract to carry out an illegal act
You mean like culpable homicide or did you mean concealing a cadaver and faking an abduction? Oops that's three illegal acts.
-
"...was its own responsibility"!! Soooo davel you are expecting us to believe the McCanns didn't know what M3 were up to in Portugal and being paid handsomely for the privilege? That my friend is a claim too far even for you. @)(++(*
At least you have now admitted that M3 were acting illegally, that must be a lightbulb moment.
I haven't admitted they acted illegally and you have been unable to cite the law that they were supposed to have broken....
The PJ were complicit with M3 so I don't see how they could have broken the law
Doesn't matter what the McCanns know if it was illegal it was M3 breaking the law...
if I hire a taxi to get me home asap....who gets the speeding ticket...
You have failed imo to show the mccanns broke the law...it is simply YOUR interpretation
-
I haven't admitted they acted illegally and you have been unable to cite the law that they were supposed to have broken....
The PJ were complicit with M3 so I don't see how they could have broken the law
Doesn't matter what the McCanns know if it was illegal it was M3 breaking the law...
if I hire a taxi to get me home asap....who gets the speeding ticket...
You have failed imo to show the mccanns broke the law...it is simply YOUR interpretation
We have already covered what elements of the Portuguese penal code apply to illegal interference in a live police investigation. Would the Met tolerate private investigators getting involved in a child murder or an abduction in London. Your naivety in this area is astounding or is it simply your agenda to obfuscate?
The PJ tolerated M3 in order to find out what they were really up to. We know where that ended up dont we? In fact, can you clarify for me just exactly what does searching for Madeleine have to do with attempts to discredit Mr Amaral? M3 were involved in this sham while being instructed and paid for by the McCanns fund. There is every reason to believe in my opinion that their illegal participation in this case extends much further than first thought!!
-
We have already covered what elements of the Portuguese penal code apply to illegal interference in a live police investigation. Would the Met tolerate private investigators getting involved in a child murder or an abduction in London. Your naivety in this area is astounding or is it simply your agenda to obfuscate?
The PJ tolerated M3 in order to find out what they were really up to. We know where that ended up dont we? In fact, can you clarify for me just exactly what does searching for Madeleine have to do with attempts to discredit Mr Amaral? M3 were involved in this sham while being instructed and paid for by the McCanns fund. There is every reason to believe in my opinion that their illegal participation in this case extends much further than first thought!!
I hadn't thought about that Angelo and I would agree that metodo weren't operating in Portugal out of the kindness of their heart neither were they being paid by anyone else but the mccanns.
-
Actually, I think Brian Kennedy was paying Metodo3.
-
I wonder who Metodo 3 were reporting their findings to ?
-
They could not have a contract to carry out an illegal act
The statement sir is true only as far it goes.
One party may hire another to commit an illegal act. That would be a contract illegal at formation and thus will not be enforceable in any court. Indeed it is cannot be a contract per se.
In this instance if the illegal act is committed by one party on behalf of the other then it remains possible for both parties to be prosecuted for the offence depending on the circumstances.
Should one party enter into a legal contract with another where one party commits an illegal act in fulfilling the contract the courts may decide the contract is enforceable. It is most probable however that only the party who committed the illegal act would face prosecution.
The problem with PI's involved in the McCann case is we, the proles, do not know who were parties to the contract and what the contract was for.
We can have jolly good fun speculating though...
-
You mean like culpable homicide or did you mean concealing a cadaver and faking an abduction? Oops that's three illegal acts.
this post makes no sense
-
We have already covered what elements of the Portuguese penal code apply to illegal interference in a live police investigation.
Did you find it and I missed it?
-
''Our first investigators, the Spanish company Método 3, began working for us in October. With private investigations technicaly ilegal in Portugal, we felt the closest we could get would be a firm from somewhere on the Iberian Peninsula, which would have the advantage of familiarity with local systems, culture and geography and the best network of contacts in the region."
-
No one has been able to state the law...that's ignorance for you
mccann knew it was illegal.
Can't you read ?
-
mccann knew it was illegal.
Can't you read ?
it isn't a matter of reading...its understanding
-
''Our first investigators, the Spanish company Método 3, began working for us in October. With private investigations technicaly ilegal in Portugal, we felt the closest we could get would be a firm from somewhere on the Iberian Peninsula, which would have the advantage of familiarity with local systems, culture and geography and the best network of contacts in the region."
Where does it say in that passage that Metodo 3 actually investigated in Portugal? Or that the McCanns condoned such investigations?
-
Have I missed where anyone has found this elusive blanket law prohibiting any kind of private investigation?
It does just seem (to me) intuitively logical that a police force (of any nation) would object to private investigators investigating a matter they are officially investigating at the same time for (I think!) obvious reasons.
All manner of potential conflicts could arise, with people of interest being interviewed more than once, information elicited by one agent missed by the other, complications introduced in attempting to construct a complete picture (by either agent).
But I confess, I have literally no clue what Portuguese law has to say on the matter (if anything!)
-
Where does it say in that passage that Metodo 3 actually investigated in Portugal? Or that the McCanns condoned such investigations?
Try watching the channel 5 program , it might be of assistance.
I assume you are able to do that ? @)(++(*
-
Are the insults start yet again.
How trite.
Try watching the channel 5 program , it might be of assistance.
I assume you are able to do that ? @)(++(*
Which Channel 5 programme are you referring to?
-
It would seem so.
I assume you refer to the programme - "the Conman and the McCanns" - I think you will find the clue to be in the name. This is beyond funny.
Perhaps you watch the program again and the admission made by those Halligen employed on behalf of the mccanns
-
What exactly does Portuguese law have to say about private investigations and official police enquiry?
I know Carana says she's not come across anything in the penal code that prohibits private investigations run in parallel with police ones into the same matter.
But it just seems, to me, intuitively right that the national police force of any country wouldn't like it ...
-
What exactly does Portuguese law have to say about private investigations and official police enquiry?
I know Carana says she's not come across anything in the penal code that prohibits private investigations run in parallel with police ones into the same matter.
But it just seems, to me, intuitively right that the national police force of any country wouldn't like it ...
From what I can see....there are no criminal PIs in portugal...this is what is illegal..thats why the mccanns had to look to spain
-
From what I can see....there are no criminal PIs in portugal...this is what is illegal..thats why the mccanns had to look to spain
Interesting. What is a Criminal Private Investigator? I thought all PIs would investigate anything.
Obviously, no Police Force would want PIs getting in the way. But six months had passed, and Amaral had been sacked by then. And The McCanns were Arguidos. Had they no right to try to find out what happened to their daughter when no one else was even remotely interested?
-
Interesting. What is a Criminal Private Investigator? I thought all PIs would investigate anything.
Obviously, no Police Force would want PIs getting in the way. But six months had passed, and Amaral had been sacked by then. And The McCanns were Arguidos. Had they no right to try to find out what happened to their daughter when no one else was even remotely interested?
I'm sorry but that makes no sense.
Merely because the mccanns were made arguido and arguida repsectively, does not mean the PJ weren't interested in finding what happened to Madeleine.
-
I'm sorry but that makes no sense.
Merely because the mccanns were made arguido and arguida repsectively, does not mean the PJ weren't interested in finding what happened to Madeleine.
Well that was polite. Thank you, Stephen.
The PJ were not looking anywhere else other than at The McCanns at the time Why else make them Arguidos?
-
Well that was polite. Thank you, Stephen.
The PJ were not looking anywhere else other than at The McCanns at the time Why else make them Arguidos?
They were still trying to solve the mystery of madeleine's disappearance.
-
They were still trying to solve the mystery of madeleine's disappearance.
Still trying to pin it on Madeleine's parents, don't you mean?
Or is that why this "Illegal" nonsense suddenly appeared?
Can't have the suspects trying to clear their own names.
-
Well that was polite. Thank you, Stephen.
The PJ were not looking anywhere else other than at The McCanns at the time Why else make them Arguidos?
They needed to make them Arguidos so that they could ask them the difficult questions. It doesn't mean they aren't investigating other leads. If course Arguido status does seem to get blown out of all proportion, it is very similar to being questioned under caution in the UK.
-
I think the mccanns upset amaral when they refused to co operate...or confess...as amaral likes to call it
-
I think the mccanns upset amaral when they refused to co operate...or confess...as amaral likes to call it
I think if you had said "the McCanns increased Amaral's suspicions when they refused to cooperate." Then you would have had fairly widespread agreement.
-
I think if you had said "the McCanns increased Amaral's suspicions when they refused to cooperate." Then you would have had fairly widespread agreement.
I said what I intended to say..
-
A "crime" has been committed in Portugal. There are no investigative agencies in Portugal suitable to hire so one from a neighbouring country is hired. What is the rationale behind the thinking that the agency hired will not carry out investigations at the location of the "crime". It would be bizarre not to.
Which party knew what and did what is a jolly jape of a guessing game my dears but logic says the crime scene would have been investigated by the PI's other wise as my uncouth partner would say "they were merely p**s**g in the wind".
-
A "crime" has been committed in Portugal. There are no investigative agencies in Portugal suitable to hire so one from a neighbouring country is hired. What is the rationale behind the thinking that the agency hired will not carry out investigations at the location of the "crime". It would be bizarre not to.
Which party knew what and did what is a jolly jape of a guessing game my dears but logic says the crime scene would have been investigated by the PI's other wise as my uncouth partner would say "they were merely p**s**g in the wind".
Did The McCanns PIs investigate the crime scene? What form did their investigations take? Who, at the crime scene did they interrogate? Sincere questions, to which I don't know the answers, perhaps you do.
-
quote" amaral has told us what the pj thought..it was the parents...they were not looking anywhere else"unquote
I don't recall the PJ or Amaral saying "it was the parents" What they were concerned about was the confusion of stories from the tapas group.
It is quite clear that the PJ and Amaral suspected that some kind of accident happened and did wonder if the parents hid the body. The dogs idea was that of the UK police.
The word accident could imply anything; abduction by burglars, Maddie leaving the building to look for her parents and going missing, falling from the sofa banging her head, taking prescription drugs thinking they were sweets... No one in Portugal accused the parents of murdering their daughter.
Team McCann knew the PI's were breaking the law by investigating a criminal investigation. oh yes Technically... Gerry loves that word. Technically it was like sitting in your back garden...hmmm yuhu
-
quote" amaral has told us what the pj thought..it was the parents...they were not looking anywhere else"unquote
I don't recall the PJ or Amaral saying "it was the parents" What they were concerned about was the confusion of stories from the tapas group.
It is quite clear that the PJ and Amaral suspected that some kind of accident happened and did wonder if the parents hid the body. The dogs idea was that of the UK police.
The word accident could imply anything; abduction by burglars, Maddie leaving the building to look for her parents and going missing, falling from the sofa banging her head, taking prescription drugs thinking they were sweets... No one in Portugal accused the parents of murdering their daughter.
Team McCann knew the PI's were breaking the law by investigating a criminal investigation. oh yes Technically... Gerry loves that word. Technically it was like sitting in your back garden...hmmm yuhu
The PJ suspected murder!
-
The PJ suspected murder!
Cite?
-
Where does it say in that passage that Metodo 3 actually investigated in Portugal? Or that the McCanns condoned such investigations?
Metodo 3's efforts in Portugal are recorded for all to see. I suggest you read the thread dedicated to them.
-
Did The McCanns PIs investigate the crime scene? What form did their investigations take? Who, at the crime scene did they interrogate? Sincere questions, to which I don't know the answers, perhaps you do.
Under judicial secrecy any witness who had given a statement would be breaking the law by repeating what they had told the police to the private investigators, resulting, we are told by Gerry, in a possible jail sentence of 2 years. Therefore it seems if Metido3 were not 'technically' breaking the law they were certainly coercing witnesses to.
-
Did The McCanns PIs investigate the crime scene? What form did their investigations take? Who, at the crime scene did they interrogate? Sincere questions, to which I don't know the answers, perhaps you do.
Crime? What crime?? 8-)(--)
For the benefit of doubt me dears there is no proof that any crime ever occurred. It is still an unfortunate statistic that the vast majority of child abductions and child murders involve a family member.
-
Cite?
Mark Harrison's terms of reference, handed to him by the PJ:
This report considers solely the possibility that Madeleine McCann has been murdered and her body is concealed within the areas previously searched by Police in Zone 1 around Praia Da Luz. Other scenarios or possibilities may on request be considered and be subject of a further report.
(Mark Harrison)
-
Crime? What crime?? 8-)(--)
For the benefit of doubt me dears there is no proof that any crime ever occurred.
Don't you think the fact that maddie is missing proves a crime took place....can you give me a scenario which does not include a crime
-
Crime? What crime?? 8-)(--)
For the benefit of doubt me dears there is no proof that any crime ever occurred. It is still an unfortunate statistic that the vast majority of child abductions and child murders involve a family member.
What?
Madeleine's disappearance is proof of a crime.
-
Mr Amaral has NEVER said or written the parents murdered their daughter- Team McCann's victim sob story to gain money from vulnerable people.
-
Lol @ Kate's book...
She admits to telling a lie but, her supporters claim this was an ok nice kind of lie- all cutsie you know, she also said "Technically illegal activities" and her supporters say no .no it's not what you think...
Saint Kate. Blessed personally by the pope!
-
Was it Brietta or Victoria a while back who produced from the files proof that the McCanns' private investigators shared with the PJ what they had found?
Odd, indeed, if what they did was illegal ...
-
Was it Brietta or Victoria a while back who produced from the files proof that the McCanns' private investigators shared with the PJ what they had found?
Odd, indeed, if what they did was illegal ...
The information passed to the PJ was from a Spanish based helpline I believe, so technically not illegal.
It was their investigations on Portuguese soil that would concern the PJ.
-
Crime? What crime?? 8-)(--)
For the benefit of doubt me dears there is no proof that any crime ever occurred. It is still an unfortunate statistic that the vast majority of child abductions and child murders involve a family member.
So Madeleine's disappearance is not as a result of any criminal act then? You must be of the"woke and wandered into a hole" persuasion then...
-
The Portuguese Code of Practice (http://www.adetectives.com/?lang=2) came in on 10 August 2007 but since Método 3 and Oakley were both based outside of Portugal neither complied with it. Back in 2007 the Portuguese police were the only entity who could legally investigate crime since private investigators were not recognised by the judicial authorities.
Kate McCann would have taken advice before writing in her book that private criminal investigations were technically illegal in Portugal thus why they employed one who was based in Spain. She failed to expand on that statement however since to do so would have opened a much larger can of worms.
As stated previously, the illegality is not set by Statute under the Portuguese Penal Code but arises where there is interference in the official investigation. We know that witnesses were harangued and harassed by agents acting on behalf of the McCanns and that is where the damage was done. They had in effect perverted the course of justice.
From Madeleine by Kate McCann
"Our first investigators, the Spanish company Método 3, began working for us in October. With private investigations technicaly ilegal in Portugal, we felt the closest we could get would be a firm from somewhere on the Iberian Peninsula, which would have the advantage of familiarity with local systems, culture and geography and the best network of contacts in the region."
Closest we could get? What Kate McCann fails to recognise is that it is irrelevant where the pi's are based since any interference in an official investigation is tantamount to illegal activity under the Portuguese judicial system. In the event however the point is academic since Método 3 did not restrict their activities to beyond Portugal's borders but undertook work paid for by the Madeleine Fund inside Portugal in direct opposition to the Portuguese Police.
Certainly worth repeating. Método 3 did operate in Portugal, they even met with the Portuguese detectives and possibly even Amaral himself to discuss the case. Little did they know then what M3's real agenda was.
-
Added
Antonio Martins, President of the National Association of Portuguese Judges, told the newspaper 24 Horas: "It is still up to the state to carry out criminal investigation. That kind of activity has no legal standing.
"Anything that results from private investigation has no substance."
Mr Martins said the private detectives and even the McCanns themselves could be accused of "obstruction of justice".
and...
Carlos Anjos, the head of Portugal's criminal police federation, added: "This can only be another diversion tactic from the McCanns. It is nothing but folklore.
"Portugal does not have legislation in this area. Private detectives who intervene in criminal cases cannot exist.
"The law only tolerates private detectives who gather information and only about matters of the private lives of certain people like extramarital relationships."
A separate police source warned that the involvement of investigators may not only be illegal but could have a detrimental effect on the inquiry.
The high ranking official told newspaper Correio da Manha: "If private investigators come here they will be running a serious risk of being arrested."
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1564121/Madeleine-McCann-police-fury-over-private-hunt.html
So there we had it from Antonio Martins, President of the National Association of Portuguese Judges and Carlos Anjos, the head of Portugal's criminal police federation, does anyone believe they are better placed to quote Portuguese Law?
And this too which one could say was from the horses mouth.
-
And this too which one could say was from the horses mouth.
this article has been posted several times...it talks of "could be illegal" and "may be illegal"...no where does it says..."is illegal"
-
Has no legal standing is quite different from being illegal.
-
Some try to obfuscate by confusing who contracted Metodo and who was giving the orders. From Kates own book.....
Quote from: Kate McCann's book Madeleine
Our first investigators, the Spanish company Método 3, began working for us in October. With private investigations technically illegal in Portugal, we felt the closest we could get would be a firm from somewhere on the Iberian Peninsula, which would have the advantage of familiarity with local systems, culture and geography and the best network of contacts in the region.
Read it well chaps >> began working for us!!
-
Some try to obfuscate by confusing who contracted Metodo and who was giving the orders. From Kates own book.....
Quote from: Kate McCann's book Madeleine
Our first investigators, the Spanish company Método 3, began working for us in October. With private investigations technically illegal in Portugal, we felt the closest we could get would be a firm from somewhere on the Iberian Peninsula, which would have the advantage of familiarity with local systems, culture and geography and the best network of contacts in the region.
I fail to see what you are getting so exercised about in that passage Angelo.
Read it well chaps >> began working for us!!
-
Don't you think the fact that maddie is missing proves a crime took place....can you give me a scenario which does not include a crime
Easy... she walked out the front door got lost and fell in a drainage trench. Or she walked out the front door got run over accidentally by someone in the dark who panicked and hid the body. The latter being an accidental crime or culpable homicide.
-
Easy... she walked out the front door got lost and fell in a drainage trench. Or she walked out the front door got run over accidentally by someone in the dark who panicked and hid the body. The latter being an accidental crime or culpable homicide.
The second one is a crime....don't you think someone would have witnessed both these scenarios
-
Easy... she walked out the front door got lost and fell in a drainage trench. Or she walked out the front door got run over accidentally by someone in the dark who panicked and hid the body. The latter being an accidental crime or culpable homicide.
That's certainly as valid as possibility as any other which is claimed. We know there were several open trenches around the town on the night Madeleine disappeared. I have seen the edge of excavations collapse many times in my own professional career as a civil engineer when someone walks too close to the edge. That is why any excavations in the UK which exceed 4' must be shored up. Had she fallen into a trench she could have been covered by material which fell in afterwards and so never found the next day.
Lots of things occur in the dark and are never reported. Had she been run over that night it was most unlikely to have been seen by anyone given how quiet that part of the town was.
Back on topic, I fail to see how the McCanns will ever be able to square their involvement with Método 3 and their admission that hiring PI's in Portugal was technically illegal. For one thing, the use of the phrase 'technically illegal' is incompetent. Something is either legal or illegal, there is no middle ground, no safe haven for wishful thinkers.
-
Easy... she walked out the front door got lost and fell in a drainage trench. Or she walked out the front door got run over accidentally by someone in the dark who panicked and hid the body. The latter being an accidental crime or culpable homicide.
Oh so now you have changed from Madeleine walked out from the patio doors to Madeleine walked out from the Front door, have you?
What made you change your mind?
And why are you so determined to never consider abduction as an option?
Do you have any pointers to show that Madeleine walked out via the front door?
Which direction do you think she went?
-
That's certainly as valid as possibility as any other which is claimed. We know there were several open trenches around the town on the night Madeleine disappeared. I have seen the edge of excavations collapse many times in my own professional career as a civil engineer when someone walks too close to the edge. That is why any excavations in the UK which exceed 4' must be shored up. Had she fallen into a trench she could have been covered by material which fell in afterwards and so never found the next day.
Lots of things occur in the dark and are never reported. Had she been run over that night it was most unlikely to have been seen by anyone given how quiet that part of the town was.
Back on topic, I fail to see how the McCanns will ever be able to square their involvement with Método 3 and their admission that hiring PI's in Portugal was technically illegal. For one thing, the use of the phrase 'technically illegal' is incompetent. Something is either legal or illegal, there is no middle ground, no safe haven for wishful thinkers.
Tell that to the Portuguese authorities who did not prosecute the PIs for this apparently illegal act.
-
Investigators employed by Halligen admitted operating in Portugal.
They admitted it was illegal.
They did so on the channel 5 program.
-
As the PJ met up with Metodo3 operatives and accepted information from them about the case - it would seem they didn't consider any lawbreaking had taken place either. They would hardly put themselves in a position of being seen to be aiding and abetting an illegal act IMO.
Quote from Joao Carlos, Inspector.
During the course of this meeting, the director of METODO 3 gave us a small book (attached), with information relative to the disappearance of the minor. This information, as we were told, was received via telephone and that they had already opened a line in Spain, specifically to receive and deal with information.
End quote
-
As the PJ met up with Metodo3 operatives and accepted information from them about the case - it would seem they didn't consider any lawbreaking had taken place either. They would hardly put themselves in a position of being seen to be aiding and abetting an illegal act IMO.
Quote from Joao Carlos, Inspector.
During the course of this meeting, the director of METODO 3 gave us a small book (attached), with information relative to the disappearance of the minor. This information, as we were told, was received via telephone and that they had already opened a line in Spain, specifically to receive and deal with information.
End quote
metodo3 have criminal convictions.
How can anyone trust them ?
-
Investigators employed by Halligen admitted operating in Portugal.
They admitted it was illegal.
They did so on the channel 5 program.
In which case the Authorites must be incredibly dim.
If they have the power to take action, why have they not exercised that power?
-
As the PJ met up with Metodo3 operatives and accepted information from them about the case - it would seem they didn't consider any lawbreaking had taken place either. They would hardly put themselves in a position of being seen to be aiding and abetting an illegal act IMO.
Quote from Joao Carlos, Inspector.
During the course of this meeting, the director of METODO 3 gave us a small book (attached), with information relative to the disappearance of the minor. This information, as we were told, was received via telephone and that they had already opened a line in Spain, specifically to receive and deal with information.
End quote
Information via Spanish telephone therefore not illegal.
We know however that several of the McCanns PIs were working in Portugal and the information gleaned from those investigations I'm sure was not passed on to the PJ.
-
In which case the Authorites must be incredibly dim.
If they have the power to take action, why have they not exercised that power?
So as the Portuguese were unaware of these activities and those involved had disappeared back to their respective countries, it would have involved considerable expense and the use of warrants to bring them to justice.
...and we know who the mccanns employed to avoid extradition, don't we.
Think 'Pinochet' and you know what he did, don't you ?
-
The earliest - and only - reference I can locate to illegality was in an article by Levy (In this post I will expose and prove how the so called journalist 'Duarte Levy' is nothing more than a con man, a swindler and a dangerous pathological liar.) http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2009/06/exposing-swindler-truth-about.html
There are numerous firms advertising Private Investigations in Portugal … even missing person searches.
I think it is therefore logical to assume that PI per se are not illegal in Portugal and are just another myth originating from suspect sources.
Just four cites from many ...
We have been established in Portugal since 1992 with offices in Lisbon, the Algarve and London. We undertake various investigations into all manner of subjects throughout the world and have agents throughout Portugal, the United Kingdom, Brazil and Angola. http://www.private-investigator-detective.net/private-investigator-detective-lisbon-portugal.html
We are handling private investigation services in Portugal and other parts of world. The region of Portugal is looked after by our international associates/partners firms who are well-established with network, highly reliable & trustworthy and experienced to provide our comprehensive investigative and intelligence services according to the locale. http://www.grevesgroup.com/portugal.html
Portugal Investigators
If you need investigators in Portugal, please fill out the form below and PInow.com will find an investigator who can assist you. http://www.pinow.com/investigators/intl/portugal
RECENT PORTUGAL INQUIRIES
Origin Investigation Location Client Type Case Type
South Africa Portugal Individual Clients (Personal Cases) Missing Persons
Tenessee Portugal Individual Clients (Personal Cases) Missing Persons
http://www.icsworld.com/Find_Local_Private_Investigator/Portugal.aspx
-
The earliest - and only - reference I can locate to illegality was in an article by Levy (In this post I will expose and prove how the so called journalist 'Duarte Levy' is nothing more than a con man, a swindler and a dangerous pathological liar.) http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2009/06/exposing-swindler-truth-about.html
There are numerous firms advertising Private Investigations in Portugal … even missing person searches.
I think it is therefore logical to assume that PI per se are not illegal in Portugal and are just another myth originating from suspect sources.
Just four cites from many ...
We have been established in Portugal since 1992 with offices in Lisbon, the Algarve and London. We undertake various investigations into all manner of subjects throughout the world and have agents throughout Portugal, the United Kingdom, Brazil and Angola. http://www.private-investigator-detective.net/private-investigator-detective-lisbon-portugal.html
We are handling private investigation services in Portugal and other parts of world. The region of Portugal is looked after by our international associates/partners firms who are well-established with network, highly reliable & trustworthy and experienced to provide our comprehensive investigative and intelligence services according to the locale. http://www.grevesgroup.com/portugal.html
Portugal Investigators
If you need investigators in Portugal, please fill out the form below and PInow.com will find an investigator who can assist you. http://www.pinow.com/investigators/intl/portugal
RECENT PORTUGAL INQUIRIES
Origin Investigation Location Client Type Case Type
South Africa Portugal Individual Clients (Personal Cases) Missing Persons
Tenessee Portugal Individual Clients (Personal Cases) Missing Persons
http://www.icsworld.com/Find_Local_Private_Investigator/Portugal.aspx
Private investigations are illegal WHILE AN OFFICIAL POLICE INVESTIGATION IS TAKING PLACE, they are not illegal per se.
-
Private investigations are illegal WHILE AN OFFICIAL POLICE INVESTIGATION IS TAKING PLACE, they are not illegal per se.
Indeed.
Brietta seems to have omitted that salient point.
-
Indeed.
Brietta seems to have omitted that salient point.
The point was so obvious I thought you might have got it ... then I forget how much you like repetition.
Interfering with an active police investigation in any way is illegal in every country in the world. Including Portugal ... how does that suit you?
But the Drs McCann searching for their daughter using private investigators ... is not.
-
The point was so obvious I thought you might have got it ... then I forget how much you like repetition.
Interfering with an active police investigation in any way is illegal in every country in the world. Including Portugal ... how does that suit you?
But the Drs McCann searching for their daughter using private investigators ... is not.
What a rubbish answer.
They could have posted the e-fits on their web-site and facebook.
.....and as you keep reminding me, at that point the case was shelved.
So where is there logic in your response ?
-
What a rubbish answer.
They could have posted the e-fits on their web-site and facebook.
.....and as you keep reminding me, at that point the case was shelved.
So where is there logic in your response ?
Read the title of the thread ... Kate McCann admits in her book that private criminal investigations in Portugal were illegal.
No she did not ... and No they are not.
The Smith family sighting was publicised in Dr McCann's book ... and I have absolutely no idea why or even if she did not place her faith in a firm which employed a convicted conman who failed to account for money stolen from clients probably including the Madeleine Fund.
-
Read the title of the thread ... Kate McCann admits in her book that private criminal investigations in Portugal were illegal.
No she did not ... and No they are not.
The Smith family sighting was publicised in Dr McCann's book ... and I have absolutely no idea why or even if she did not place her faith in a firm which employed a convicted conman who failed to account for money stolen from clients probably including the Madeleine Fund.
Proof please. 8)-)))
-
Watch the C5 program and hear what the employee of Halligen said.
-
Watch the C5 program and hear what the employee of Halligen said.
you probably misheard it
-
Private investigations are illegal WHILE AN OFFICIAL POLICE INVESTIGATION IS TAKING PLACE, they are not illegal per se.
Very much so and the status quo back in 2007 was very different to what it is now in 2014. Private criminal investigators would not be tolerated in the UK in a live investigation so I fail to see how Portugal is any different unless of course it is considered the 'wild west' by the ill-informed and those with an agenda to pursue.
It all comes down to interference with an official investigation which can be rightly labelled obstruction or attempting to pervert the course of justice. In her book, Kate McCann states that the reason for using Método 3 was because the PJ were no longer searching for Madeleine. That was in fact a false assessment of the situation. Senior PJ officers gave evidence at the recent hearings in Lisbon that the case was never closed even after the archiving. Even then, a small team was tasked with disseminating any new information which came into them about the case. The search for Madeleine never ended.
-
Very much so and the status quo back in 2007 was very different to what it is now in 2014. Private criminal investigators would not be tolerated in the UK in a live investigation so I fail to see how Portugal is any different unless of course it is considered the 'wild west' by the ill-informed and those with an agenda to pursue.
It all comes down to interference with an official investigation which can be rightly labelled obstruction or attempting to pervert the course of justice. In her book, Kate McCann states that the reason for using Método 3 was because the PJ were no longer searching for Madeleine. That was in fact a false assessment of the situation. Senior PJ officers gave evidence at the recent hearings in Lisbon that the case was never closed even after the archiving. Even then, a small team was tasked with disseminating any new information which came into them about the case. The search for Madeleine never ended.
Yep, but Ricardo Paiva was labelling everything NOT RELEVANT, when they clearly were.
-
Yep, but Ricardo Paiva was labelling everything NOT RELEVANT, when they clearly were.
Absolutely and Kate reckons he is a [sic] f.....g tosser (at least she did when she wrote Madeleine).
Each time a dog gave a signal, Ricardo would pause the video and inform me that blood had been found in this site and that the DNA from the sample matched Madeleine’s. He would stare at me intently and ask me to explain this. These were the only times I didn’t respond with a ‘No comment.’ Instead I said I couldn’t explain it, but neither could he. I remember feeling such disdain for Ricardo at this point. What was he doing? I thought. Just folowing orders? Under my breath, I found myself whispering, ‘f.....g tosser, f.....g tosser.’ This quiet chant somehow kept me strong, kept me in control. This man did not deserve my respect. ‘f.....g tosser . .
-
Absolutely and Kate reckons he is a [sic] f.....g tosser (at least she did when she wrote Madeleine).
Those words of kate mccann and 'others' in that book will label her for years to come.
The sheer arrogance of the woman is sometimes breathtaking.
-
Absolutely and Kate reckons he is a [sic] f.....g tosser (at least she did when she wrote Madeleine).
Given his sharp exit to Madeira and the scandal preceding it, perhaps she was being a wee bit psychic on that occasion.
-
Given his sharp exit to Madeira and the scandal preceding it, perhaps she was being a wee bit psychic on that occasion.
7
...or maybe he was, like a lot of people he was pi###d off with all the press intrusion around the case.
-
7
...or maybe he was, like a lot of people he was pi###d off with all the press intrusion around the case.
Check it out Stephen ... but I would make an educated guess you know already .
-
Given his sharp exit to Madeira and the scandal preceding it, perhaps she was being a wee bit psychic on that occasion.
I think from the press reports at the time you may be on the right lines there Brietta 8)--))
-
Those words of kate mccann and 'others' in that book will label her for years to come.
The sheer arrogance of the woman is sometimes breathtaking.
I think she's wonderful
-
Such an exceptional mother that she was cleaning a stain and chatting by the pool about paedos instead of watching her daughter sailing for the first time on the day she disappeared. Talk about paedos seemed to be the order of the day!
"The only other unexplained detail I remember from that morning was a large, brown stain I noticed on Madeleine’s pink Eeyore pyjama top. I couldn’t recall seeing it the night before and I had no idea how it might have got there. It looked like a tea stain. Gerry and I do drink quite a bit of tea, and Madeleine, too, would have the odd small cup. So at the time I just assumed it was a drink spillage that had escaped our attention, and that might well be all it was. But now, of course, we can no longer make assumptions about anything that can’t be accounted for.
The morning continued like the others with kids’ clubs and tennis. After my lesson, I hung around on the grassy play area, watching Gerry on the court and chatting to Russell, who I’d found there. Another guest appeared with a video camera to record his three-year-old daughter playing mini-tennis. He looked a little embarrassed and laughingly remarked to us that filming in this way made him feel like a dirty old man. It led to a conversation between the three of us about paedophiles. I remember Russell talking about how everything had got a bit out of hand, that these days people were so untrusting you hardly dared speak to children you didn’t know. What he was effectively saying was that the world had become paranoid; that he wanted his daughters to grow up with confidence and a sense of freedom. The other dad and I chipped in with our views – I mentioned not being allowed to take photographs of your own kids in swimming pools any longer – and we agreed that it was a shame things had come to this, especially for the children. It would be some days before Russell and I were able to acknowledge to each other the horrible irony of this conversation." (Madeleine)
-
Such an exceptional mother that she was cleaning a stain and chatting by the pool about paedos instead of watching her daughter sailing for the first time on the day she disappeared. Talk about paedos seemed to be rife that day!
I forgot that one.
Such a sad,sad coincidence that... there Kate was, by the pool, merrily chewing over sexual deviants (as one does).... then it just so happens that a Portuguese paedophile gang member (who could be mistaken for Gerry, wore some buttoned trousers) entered 5a, with a key, hung around for a hour moving the bedroom door & opening the window for whatever reason, before then leaving with Madeleine (having changed her pyjamas & sedated her & the twins) via the front door, closing & locking it behind him.
Tragic.
-
If private detectives are illegal in Portugal, why did the PJ follow up information given to them by Metodo 3 about a lorry driver they had traced who they thought might have had information re Madeleine.
Seems they were content to act on the information relayed from M3 on a live case which suggests it is total nonsense that such activities were considered to be illegal.
PRIVATE DETECTIVES
3445 to 3454 External diligence carried out re: Metodo 3, 2007.11.21
Page 3445-3449: The external diligence report dated 21 November on the follow up work done
Page 3450-3453: supporting photos taken during the follow up, and
Page 3454: phone mast evidence exonerating M Walczuch, R Murat, S Malinka and L Antonio from any involvement in the alleged sighting by the truck driver.
In point form:
- The PJ traced the driver, Manuel A P Gautier, and spoke to him.
- He acknowledged speaking to M3 on 3 November.
- He and PJ met by agreement at a given location on IC1.
- The driver related his story of having seen a grey Audi and a green car (possibly Opel Astra) on 4 May between 15h00 and 17h00 in the IC1 freeway
- He saw a woman (standing next to the Audi) pass something wrapped in cloth to a man (next to the green car) over the metal fence.
- From what he could make out it was not very heavy and there was nothing to suggest it might have been a child.
- They went to the location where photos were taken.
- The resident of a nearby house was questioned by the PJ. He neither saw nor heard vehicles in his 'driveway' on 4 May, and noticed nothing untoward with the closed gate across its entrance.
- The driver stated that from pictures in the printed media he recognised some resemblance between MW and the woman he saw on 4 May, mainly some facial features, her build and hair colour, but he could not positively assert that it was her.
- The driver could not recall the man.
- The PJ checked the phone antenna records for 4 May and found phone calls to and from MW, RM, SM and LA during that day, and during the time of the alleged observation, all calls showing they were all some 65 km away from the location of the alleged sighting.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/METODO_3.htm
-
If private detectives are illegal in Portugal, why did the PJ follow up information given to them by Metodo 3 about a lorry driver they had traced who they thought might have had information re Madeleine.
Seems they were content to act on the information relayed from M3 on a live case which suggests it is total nonsense that such activities were considered to be illegal.
PRIVATE DETECTIVES
3445 to 3454 External diligence carried out re: Metodo 3, 2007.11.21
Page 3445-3449: The external diligence report dated 21 November on the follow up work done
Page 3450-3453: supporting photos taken during the follow up, and
Page 3454: phone mast evidence exonerating M Walczuch, R Murat, S Malinka and L Antonio from any involvement in the alleged sighting by the truck driver.
In point form:
- The PJ traced the driver, Manuel A P Gautier, and spoke to him.
- He acknowledged speaking to M3 on 3 November.
- He and PJ met by agreement at a given location on IC1.
- The driver related his story of having seen a grey Audi and a green car (possibly Opel Astra) on 4 May between 15h00 and 17h00 in the IC1 freeway
- He saw a woman (standing next to the Audi) pass something wrapped in cloth to a man (next to the green car) over the metal fence.
- From what he could make out it was not very heavy and there was nothing to suggest it might have been a child.
- They went to the location where photos were taken.
- The resident of a nearby house was questioned by the PJ. He neither saw nor heard vehicles in his 'driveway' on 4 May, and noticed nothing untoward with the closed gate across its entrance.
- The driver stated that from pictures in the printed media he recognised some resemblance between MW and the woman he saw on 4 May, mainly some facial features, her build and hair colour, but he could not positively assert that it was her.
- The driver could not recall the man.
- The PJ checked the phone antenna records for 4 May and found phone calls to and from MW, RM, SM and LA during that day, and during the time of the alleged observation, all calls showing they were all some 65 km away from the location of the alleged sighting.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/METODO_3.htm
Why?
-
Why?
Why what?
-
Why what?
My dear I see that this will be like pulling teeth.
I highlighted the part in question but as you wish to have it written on a sign in 32 point and held in front of you:-
Why do you think it is a nonsense that the PJ should have followed up on information provided by Metodo3?
Under Portuguese law the information provided by a private inquiry agent would not be admissible in court so it would seem natural that the police would follow it up and interview persons as it would be admissible then if presented by the police.
Whether or not Metodo3 were chastised for being under the feet of the PJ we shall never know.
-
My dear I see that this will be like pulling teeth.
I highlighted the part in question but as you wish to have it written on a sign in 32 point and held in front of you:-
Why do you think it is a nonsense that the PJ should have followed up on information provided by Metodo3?
Under Portuguese law the information provided by a private inquiry agent would not be admissible in court so it would seem natural that the police would follow it up and interview persons as it would be admissible then if presented by the police.
Whether or not Metodo3 were chastised for being under the feet of the PJ we shall never know.
Has anyone been charged?
-
My dear I see that this will be like pulling teeth.
I highlighted the part in question but as you wish to have it written on a sign in 32 point and held in front of you:-
Why do you think it is a nonsense that the PJ should have followed up on information provided by Metodo3?
Under Portuguese law the information provided by a private inquiry agent would not be admissible in court so it would seem natural that the police would follow it up and interview persons as it would be admissible then if presented by the police.
Whether or not Metodo3 were chastised for being under the feet of the PJ we shall never know.
Hmmm … in other words – it is not illegal in Portugal for Private Investigators to work in conjunction with the policing authority on a live case – the PIs do the initial investigation – the PJ act on that initial investigation either to rule it in or rule it out of the inquiry, as in this case – however had it been found to have had substance, information from the PI inquiry would be ‘sanitised’ by a police investigation to make it admissible in a court of law.
Just as the Met can do nothing when working in Portugal without the co-operation of the authorities; neither could the private detectives hired by the fund.
Therefore it is not illegal to use private investigators in a live criminal investigation in Portugal.
Thank you for your invaluable attempt to assist but if you read my initial post very carefully you will comprehend that is what I said.
IT IS NOT ILLEGAL ... so sorry for shouting but you do seem to be a little hard of hearing.
-
Hmmm … in other words – it is not illegal in Portugal for Private Investigators to work in conjunction with the policing authority on a live case – the PIs do the initial investigation – the PJ act on that initial investigation either to rule it in or rule it out of the inquiry, as in this case – however had it been found to have had substance, information from the PI inquiry would be ‘sanitised’ by a police investigation to make it admissible in a court of law.
Just as the Met can do nothing when working in Portugal without the co-operation of the authorities; neither could the private detectives hired by the fund.
Therefore it is not illegal to use private investigators in a live criminal investigation in Portugal.
Thank you for your invaluable attempt to assist but if you read my initial post very carefully you will comprehend that is what I said.
IT IS NOT ILLEGAL ... so sorry for shouting but you do seem to be a little hard of hearing.
So this is what it amounts to. Not admissible in a Court of Law. But not illegal.
-
So this is what it amounts to. Not admissible in a Court of Law. But not illegal.
It would seem that there are several aspects:
- The use of illegal means (which would be a criminal offence anywhere). There is no evidence of the use of such means.
- The use of evidence gathered by illegal means. Such evidence wouldn't be allowed in a court (anywhere, in theory).
- The use of evidence gathered by PIs directly in a court case without passing via the PJ. PIs have no legal standing, therefore their evidence would not be admissible in court as evidence. It would therefore be up to the PJ to check out that "intelligence" to seek evidence.
I'm still waiting for someone to show me a specific article in the PT codes whereby gathering any potential information legally and presenting it to the police so that they can check it out would be illegal. As far as I'm aware, that is what happened.
The newspaper article that stated that the use of PIs may be illegal grew wings and became troo fact... As usual.
-
Hmmm … in other words – it is not illegal in Portugal for Private Investigators to work in conjunction with the policing authority on a live case – the PIs do the initial investigation – the PJ act on that initial investigation either to rule it in or rule it out of the inquiry, as in this case – however had it been found to have had substance, information from the PI inquiry would be ‘sanitised’ by a police investigation to make it admissible in a court of law.
Just as the Met can do nothing when working in Portugal without the co-operation of the authorities; neither could the private detectives hired by the fund.
Therefore it is not illegal to use private investigators in a live criminal investigation in Portugal.
Thank you for your invaluable attempt to assist but if you read my initial post very carefully you will comprehend that is what I said.
IT IS NOT ILLEGAL ... so sorry for shouting but you do seem to be a little hard of hearing.
On what do you base that opinion?
As I posted somewhere on this forum until someone writes to a Portuguese Abrogado and obtains a definitive answer re-the legality of private investigators working on a criminal investigation in Portugal it is all guesswork on here by incompletely informed internet punters. That may be unpalatable to some but "that's where it's at baby".
-
On what do you base that opinion?
As I posted somewhere on this forum until someone writes to a Portuguese Abrogado and obtains a definitive answer re-the legality of private investigators working on a criminal investigation in Portugal it is all guesswork on here by incompletely informed internet punters. That may be unpalatable to some but "that's where it's at baby".
You have made this point several times and I agree to a certain extent...therefore it is wrong to claim that private investigations as described are illegal in Portugal....we simply don't know that they are...
What I have also noticed is that you have only made this point to those who say investigations are legal but never to those who say they are illegal....
the bias is very apparrent
-
The illegality comes from the obstruction of justice element previously referred to. The involvement of private investigators in a live criminal case could have had serious repercussions for any trial. That said the PJ were only too glad to receive leads from Método 3 up until the point their true agenda was revealed.
-
The illegality comes from the obstruction of justice element previously referred to. The involvement of private investigators in a live criminal case could have had serious repercussions for any trial. That said the PJ were only too glad to receive leads from Método 3 up until the point their true agenda was revealed.
What was their true agenda then, John?
-
What was their true agenda then, John?
Yes, I'd like to know the answer to this question to. If Metodo 3's "agenda" was not to find a missing child at the behest of her parents, then what was it, pray tell?
-
Yes, I'd like to know the answer to this question to. If Metodo 3's "agenda" was not to find a missing child at the behest of her parents, then what was it, pray tell?
It would be interesting to hear your view on this John
-
You have made this point several times and I agree to a certain extent...therefore it is wrong to claim that private investigations as described are illegal in Portugal....we simply don't know that they are...
What I have also noticed is that you have only made this point to those who say investigations are legal but never to those who say they are illegal....
the bias is very apparrent
The point I am making to all and sundry is that there is no reliable evidence on this forum to make a decision one way or another so how is that biased? With regard to bias your own is startlingly obvious so what is your objection to someone having a bias which is opposed to your own? And why bother making the point. No one on this forum is truly unbiased as far I observe.
-
The point I am making to all and sundry is that there is no reliable evidence on this forum to make a decision one way or another so how is that biased? With regard to bias your own is startlingly obvious so what is your objection to someone having a bias which is opposed to your own? And why bother making the point. No one on this forum is truly unbiased as far I observe.
I've no objection to bias. What I am saying is that you are demonstrating your bias by only making this point in response to posts by McCann supporters...you are absolutely right there is no reliable evidence either way so it is wrong to say that the mccanns and their detectives have broken any laws
-
The mccanns broke the law.
It's quite clear cut.
so there you are Stephen according to alice you are totally wrong
-
so there you are Stephen according to alice you are totally wrong
I know this is a difficult concept to grasp for you, but try watching the channel 5 program where Halligen's PI employee admits it was illegal. 8((()*/
-
I've no objection to bias. What I am saying is that you are demonstrating your bias by only making this point in response to posts by McCann supporters...you are absolutely right there is no reliable evidence either way so it is wrong to say that the mccanns and their detectives have broken any laws
As we have debated to death: It would be questionable whether the McCanns had broken the law even their detectives had; it would depend on how any contract had been constructed. It is also equally incorrect to say the McCanns detectives have not broken the law. In the event they both had prosecution would depend on whether a conviction could be secured on the evidence available and all that it implies. As we have agreed there is no evidence either way. So why not leave it that? instead of doing the political thing of presenting the same fact in a different manner over and over again depending upon your particular bias.
-
As we have debated to death: It would be questionable whether the McCanns had broken the law even their detectives had; it would depend on how any contract had been constructed. It is also equally incorrect to say the McCanns detectives have not broken the law. In the event they both had prosecution would depend on whether a conviction could be secured on the evidence available and all that it implies. As we have agreed there is no evidence either way. So why not leave it that? instead of doing the political thing of presenting the same fact in a different manner over and over again depending upon your particular bias.
perhaps you could ask Stephen to read your posts because he continues to insist the mccanns have broken the law....
what you fail to notice is the thread starts with an accusation that the mccanns broke the law...my stance all along has been there is no evidence the mccanns broke the law...you confirm, in your opinion, I am correct
-
I know this is a difficult concept to grasp for you, but try watching the channel 5 program where Halligen's PI employee admits it was illegal. 8((()*/
seem alice agrees with me stephen
-
As we have debated to death: It would be questionable whether the McCanns had broken the law even their detectives had; it would depend on how any contract had been constructed. It is also equally incorrect to say the McCanns detectives have not broken the law. In the event they both had prosecution would depend on whether a conviction could be secured on the evidence available and all that it implies. As we have agreed there is no evidence either way. So why not leave it that? instead of doing the political thing of presenting the same fact in a different manner over and over again depending upon your particular bias.
I have no problem that evidence presented by the McCanns via a PI would not be valid in court... but that wasn't the issue.
The issue is whether efforts to help find her, with any potentially useful info presented to the PJ, were illegal per se.
With several PT posters on here, I would have thought that at least one of them could have presented the relevant article in the PT penal code by now.
-
perhaps it would be better if you took a rest and let posters get on with debating
Perhaps you might watch your language.
-
I have no problem that evidence presented by the McCanns via a PI would not be valid in court... but that wasn't the issue.
The issue is whether efforts to help find her, with any potentially useful info presented to the PJ, were illegal per se.
With several PT posters on here, I would have thought that at least one of them could have presented the relevant article in the PT penal code by now.
Kate and Gerry must have taken (I'm sure) sound advice, or Kate wouldn't have said what she did in her book.
Kate has an uncanny knack of being right about these things.
Are you sure you've read the whole of the Portuguese penal code?
Or could there be a part you've missed?
-
Kate and Gerry must have taken (I'm sure) sound advice, or Kate wouldn't have said what she did in her book.
Kate has an uncanny knack of being right about these things.
Are you sure you've read the whole of the Portuguese penal code?
Or could there be a part you've missed?
@)(++(*
-
Kate and Gerry must have taken (I'm sure) sound advice, or Kate wouldn't have said what she did in her book.
Kate has an uncanny knack of being right about these things.
Are you sure you've read the whole of the Portuguese penal code?
Or could there be a part you've missed?
I might have missed it, which is why I been asking the PT speakers on here to help locate the relevant article for months. Still no reply from any of them.
-
I might have missed it, which is why I been asking the PT speakers on here to help locate the relevant article for months. Still no reply from any of them.
they don't need any evidence to accuse the Mccanns of wrongdoing...just keep on throwing mud as they have done for seven years and some will stick
-
I disagree - the issue of this thread is whether or not Kate McCann admitted in her book to carrying out illegal activities. After all these pages the moderators of this board still refuse to accept that she did not, and that the thread title is therefore inaccurate and libellous.
Yep!
The question of what actually is or actually isn't illegal (in Portugal) is an ancillary (if very interesting) point.
-
The title of this thread is 100% correct. Kate McCann did admit and accept in her book 'Madeleine' that private investigations in Portugal were illegal.
It should be pointed out however that this statement was incorrect.
From Madeleine.
"Our first investigators, the Spanish company Método 3, began working for us in October. With private investigations technically illegal in Portugal, we felt the closest we could get would be a firm from somewhere on the Iberian Peninsula, which would have the advantage of familiarity with local systems, culture and geography and the best network of contacts in the region."
Private investigations were not illegal in Portugal even in 2007 but private criminal investigations were considered illegal in that such had no basis in Law whilst an official police investigation was ongoing.
This was the understanding of Antonio Martins, president of the National Association of Portuguese Judges and Carlos Anjos, the head of Portugal's criminal police federation. Mr Martins is on record as stating that private detectives and even the McCanns themselves could be accused of "obstruction of justice" while Mr Anjos stated that Portugal does not have legislation in this area and that private detectives do not intervene in criminal cases. He added that private detectives are only tolerated in civil cases.
-
The title of this thread is 100% correct. Kate McCann did admit and accept in her book 'Madeleine' that private investigations in Portugal were illegal.
It should be pointed out however that this statement was incorrect.
From Madeleine.
"Our first investigators, the Spanish company Método 3, began working for us in October. With private investigations technically illegal in Portugal, we felt the closest we could get would be a firm from somewhere on the Iberian Peninsula, which would have the advantage of familiarity with local systems, culture and geography and the best network of contacts in the region."
Private investigations were not illegal in Portugal even in 2007 but private criminal investigations were considered illegal in that such had no basis in Law whilst an official police investigation was ongoing.
Mr Moderator with respect you are wrong. Kate states in her book that because private investigations were 'technically illegal' in Portugal they therefore hired a firm from Spain in order to avoid the possibility of breaking any Portuguese law. There is absolutely NO admission of guilt whatsoever. I simply don't understand how you can fail to see this!
-
Mr Moderator with respect you are wrong. Kate states in her book that because private investigations were 'technically illegal' in Portugal they therefore hired a firm from Spain in order to avoid the possibility of breaking any Portuguese law. There is absolutely NO admission of guilt whatsoever. I simply don't understand how you can fail to see this!
Hiring a Spanish private investigator did not circumvent the illegality to which I have just described and corroborated by two of the highest ranking legal officers in Portugal at the time. It makes no difference where the PI's were based, any interference in a Portuguese criminal inquiry was contrary to Law.
Had Método 3 limited their efforts to enquiries outside of Portugal you might have had a point but they did not. They got involved directly in the search in Portugal. Question is who pulled the plug on them, the Portuguese or the Spanish of the both of them jointly?
-
Hiring a Spanish private investigator did not circumvent the illegality to which I have just described and corroborated by two of the highest ranking legal officers in Portugal at the time. It makes no difference where the PI's were based, any interference in a Portuguese criminal inquiry was contrary to Law.
no one has been able to quote this law
-
no one has been able to quote this law
As you very well know or should know, Portugal did not have legislation in this area. However, interference in a live inquiry is well covered by obstruction laws.
-
As you very well know or should know, Portugal did not have legislation in this area. However, interference in a live inquiry is well covered by obstruction laws.
so the same as every other country..as long as the PIs don't get in the way they seem to be welcome as the PJ made M3 welcome
-
Hiring a Spanish private investigator did not circumvent the illegality to which I have just described and corroborated by two of the highest ranking legal officers in Portugal at the time. It makes no difference where the PI's were based, any interference in a Portuguese criminal inquiry was contrary to Law.
Had Método 3 limited their efforts to enquiries outside of Portugal you might have had a point but they did not. They got involved directly in the search in Portugal. Question is who pulled the plug on them, the Portuguese or the Spanish of the both of them jointly?
Not forgetting what happened with Ciprianos old lawyer John Grade before Marcos Correia took over the case allegedely on a pro bono basis yet his fees were being met by a mystery donor. And all the time the strings were being pulled by M3 in Barcelona who in turn were doing it all out of the goodness of their hearts. Brings a tear to the eye 8)><(
-
so the same as every other country..as long as the PIs don't get in the way they seem to be welcome as the PJ made M3 welcome
The word you are looking for is tolerate and the PJ tolerated them just enough for a short while to see what they were up to. They didn't have to wait long though and we all know what happened next as Correia couldn't keep his big mouth shut.
-
The word you are looking for is tolerate and the PJ tolerated them just enough for a short while to see what they were up to. They didn't have to wait long though and we all know what happened next as Correia couldn't keep his big mouth shut.
Remind us Matt, which South American country was Correia last seen making for?? @)(++(* @)(++(*
-
Remind us Matt, which South American country was Correia last seen making for?? @)(++(* @)(++(*
If you have ever had a Brazilian girlfriend you might be tempted to follow him
-
If you have ever had a Brazilian girlfriend you might be tempted to follow him
With Amaral's pal Paiva in Funchal I don't think he will be in a big rush home.
-
Hiring a Spanish private investigator did not circumvent the illegality to which I have just described and corroborated by two of the highest ranking legal officers in Portugal at the time. It makes no difference where the PI's were based, any interference in a Portuguese criminal inquiry was contrary to Law.
Had Método 3 limited their efforts to enquiries outside of Portugal you might have had a point but they did not. They got involved directly in the search in Portugal. Question is who pulled the plug on them, the Portuguese or the Spanish of the both of them jointly?
Please can you quote Kate McCann's admission that she broke the law then, because the paragraph that keeps being quoted here is no admission of guilt.
-
Please can you quote Kate McCann's admission that she broke the law then, because the paragraph that keeps being quoted here is no admission of guilt.
Which part of Kate's comment are you obfuscating over Alfred? Is it the bit where she admits that private investigations in Portugal were illegal or is it the bit where she states they employed them anyway to work in Portugal thinking that if their offices were in Barcelona then that was Ok?
-
I repeat for the sake of clarity...
Hiring a Spanish private investigator did not circumvent the illegality to which I have just described and corroborated by two of the highest ranking legal officers in Portugal at the time. It makes no difference where the PI's were based, any interference in a Portuguese criminal inquiry was contrary to Law.
Had Método 3 limited their efforts to enquiries outside of Portugal you might have had a point but they did not. They got involved directly in the search in Portugal. Question is who pulled the plug on them, the Portuguese or the Spanish of the both of them jointly in collaboration?
-
I repeat for the sake of clarity...
Hiring a Spanish private investigator did not circumvent the illegality to which I have just described and corroborated by two of the highest ranking legal officers in Portugal at the time. It makes no difference where the PI's were based, any interference in a Portuguese criminal inquiry was contrary to Law.
Had Método 3 limited their efforts to enquiries outside of Portugal you might have had a point but they did not. They got involved directly in the search in Portugal. Question is who pulled the plug on them, the Portuguese or the Spanish of the both of them jointly in collaboration?
Please don't do this to me. This is obfuscating at it's worst. Who pulled the plug on anyone?
-
I repeat for the sake of clarity...
Hiring a Spanish private investigator did not circumvent the illegality to which I have just described and corroborated by two of the highest ranking legal officers in Portugal at the time. It makes no difference where the PI's were based, any interference in a Portuguese criminal inquiry was contrary to Law.
Had Método 3 limited their efforts to enquiries outside of Portugal you might have had a point but they did not. They got involved directly in the search in Portugal. Question is who pulled the plug on them, the Portuguese or the Spanish of the both of them jointly in collaboration?
Could you elucidate?
What did Metodo 3 do that was illegal?
There are numerous PT posters here, but none have provided the relevant laws... and they've had months to check it out. The silence seems deafening.
-
Which part of Kate's comment are you obfuscating over Alfred? Is it the bit where she admits that private investigations in Portugal were illegal or is it the bit where she states they employed them anyway to work in Portugal thinking that if their offices were in Barcelona then that was Ok?
I've read and re-read Kate's book and nowhere does she say "we knew hiring detectives in Portugal was illegal so we decided to hire a Spanish team and get them to break the law anyway" - perhaps you can shed some light?
-
Jesus H. I despair sometimes. I have no quarrel with diverse opinions. But please do stop feeding me bullshit. I need go see Evidence, at least.
-
I repeat for the sake of clarity...
Hiring a Spanish private investigator did not circumvent the illegality to which I have just described and corroborated by two of the highest ranking legal officers in Portugal at the time. It makes no difference where the PI's were based, any interference in a Portuguese criminal inquiry was contrary to Law.
Had Método 3 limited their efforts to enquiries outside of Portugal you might have had a point but they did not. They got involved directly in the search in Portugal. Question is who pulled the plug on them, the Portuguese or the Spanish of the both of them jointly in collaboration?
Could you repeat who they were and what they actually said, please?
Wasn't one of them Carlos Anjos? If so, I wouldn't consider him to be objective. Soz.
-
Could you repeat who they were and what they actually said, please?
Wasn't one of them Carlos Anjos? If so, I wouldn't consider him to be objective. Soz.
Soz? Tee Hee. How frightfully up market.
-
Which part of Kate's comment are you obfuscating over Alfred? Is it the bit where she admits that private investigations in Portugal were illegal or is it the bit where she states they employed them anyway to work in Portugal thinking that if their offices were in Barcelona then that was Ok?
Using the word 'admits' is misleading IMO. That infers guilt of some kind - whereas Kate is simply stating why they employed a Spanish based company and not a Portugese one. She is giving an explanation - not making a confession.
Common sense dictates that the fact that the PJ liaised with Metodo and accepted information about the case from them strongly indicates that no illegal conduct was considered to have taken place IMO.
-
Kate McCann admits in her book that private criminal investigations in Portugal were illegal.
I would imagine that if one argued on the basis of synonyms for "admit" as for example "acknowledge" or "reveal" it would be quite easy. That would of course remove the emotive quality of the word "admit" and eliminate the fun derived from it on this forum.
Come now Mr Jones ,sir, would you really wish to deprive yourself of the fun and opportunity of being able to make disparaging remarks about those holding an opposing view to your goodself ?
-
Kate McCann admits in her book that private criminal investigations in Portugal were illegal.
I would imagine that if one argued on the basis of synonyms for "admit" as for example "acknowledge" or "reveal" it would be quite easy. That would of course remove the emotive quality of the word "admit" and eliminate the fun derived from it on this forum.
Come now Mr Jones ,sir, would you really wish to deprive yourself of the fun and opportunity of being able to make disparaging remarks about those holding an opposing view to your goodself ?
Exactly.
-
Kate McCann admits in her book that private criminal investigations in Portugal were illegal.
I would imagine that if one argued on the basis of synonyms for "admit" as for example "acknowledge" or "reveal" it would be quite easy. That would of course remove the emotive quality of the word "admit" and eliminate the fun derived from it on this forum.
Come now Mr Jones ,sir, would you really wish to deprive yourself of the fun and opportunity of being able to make disparaging remarks about those holding an opposing view to your goodself ?
Why do you suppose it is a good idea for anyone to 'admit' to something which is patently untrue.
What are you offering? one or two years with time off for good behaviour?
-
Why do you suppose it is a good idea for anyone to 'admit' to something which is patently untrue.
What are you offering? one or two years with time off for good behaviour?
You seem to be missing the whole point of my post, my dear. Whether by accident or design is not clear.
Please do lighten up a little, life on here is not real and merely provides an amusing diversion. The police are doing the real work.
-
You seem to be missing the whole point of my post, my dear. Whether by accident or design is not clear.
Please do lighten up a little, life on here is not real and merely provides an amusing diversion. The police are doing the real work.
An amusing diversion for what? For whom?
-
An amusing diversion for what? For whom?
Oh, I think we all knew that, don't you?
-
Reminds me of a worm on a hook, all that wriggling. Bottom line is the thread title is absolutely spot on, KMcC knew employing private investigators to work in a criminal case in Portugal was against the law but did it anyway. Gosh, you will be suggesting next that Metodo 3 were a law unto themselves and did it all without the McCanns knowing about it. That dear friends is the real fantasy. 8(0(*
-
Could you elucidate?
What did Metodo 3 do that was illegal?
There are numerous PT posters here, but none have provided the relevant laws... and they've had months to check it out. The silence seems deafening.
Interference in the official investigation
Harassing witnesses
Bribery
Faking sightings
Attempt to perfect the course of justice
...need any more Carana then I suggest you Google Metodo 3.
-
Reminds me of a worm on a hook, all that wriggling. Bottom line is the thread title is absolutely spot on, KMcC knew employing private investigators to work in a criminal case in Portugal was against the law but did it anyway. Gosh, you will be suggesting next that Metodo 3 were a law unto themselves and did it all without the McCanns knowing about it. That dear friends is the real fantasy. 8(0(*
So why did the PJ meet with Metodo3 operatives, and accept and act on information from them about the case instead of arresting them? That makes no sense if Metodo had been acting illegally.
-
Metodo knew they were on shaky ground...
On 19 October 2007, Alberto Carbas, the head of the Spanish CID Anti-Kidnapping Unit (Unidad de Secuestros de la Policia Judicial) contacted the PJ and asked detectives in charge of Madeleine's investigation it they were willing to have a meeting with a representative from Metodo 3 and a Spanish police officer from the same unit.
The purpose of the meeting was to give the PJ some information those detectives had. The Spanish police officer made clear that Metodo 3 had no intention of interfering in the Portuguese police work, but only to transmit some useful information. In the same contact, Metodo 3 said that they were not working for the McCanns, but for Brian Kennedy.
On November 13, 2007, the meeting took place, in Portimão. Two PJ detectives – Ricardo Paiva and Paulo Ferreira. - the director of Metodo 3, Mr. Francisco Marco, an adviser from the private detectives company, Mr. António Jimenez (former head of Police Anti-Kidnapping Unit from Catalonia) and Mr. Brian Kennedy participated in the meeting.
The two PJ detectives submitted a report, about the meeting, the information exchanged and the investigations, following the leads given by Metodo 3.
On the report, which is in the DVD files, it's referred that Mr. Kennedy stressed, just as the meeting started, that his only intent was a charitable one, because he was concerned with cases related with child neglect and missing children. He stated that his concern, in that specific case, was only the truth and nothing more than the truth, irrespective if the McCanns, their friends or any other person was involved or suspect.
-
You seem to be missing the whole point of my post, my dear. Whether by accident or design is not clear.
Please do lighten up a little, life on here is not real and merely provides an amusing diversion. The police are doing the real work.
You always gave me the impression you were patronising us by deigning to post here ~ seems I may not been too far off the mark ~ however your supercilious remarks fail to obscure that you are a person with a particular bias and your own agenda. So do continue to have fun, as they say rather threateningly in restaurants … “Enjoy”.
-
and more...
So, what were Metodo 3 doing for nearly two months before the McCanns announced that they had been hired?
Were they receiving £50,000 per month from Madeleine's Fund, and an undisclosed sum from the McCanns' wealthy backers, just for keeping secret?
It is more likely they were working stealthily to get witnesses on board to support the McCanns case. According to Clarence Mitchell, Metodo 3 have been active in Portugal, which is illegal under Portuguese law, but Mr Mitchell claims Alipio Ribeiro has been turning a blind eye to it.
Daily Mail, 28 November 2007:
The McCanns' spokesman, Clarence Mitchell, said: "The fund has agreed to pay Metodo 3 £50,000 a month towards their costs."
Asked about donations, he said: "Money pours in at the start and dries up after a while, it's only natural. Money is still coming in."
Daily Mail, 10 January 2008:
'He (Clarence Mitchell) said the Find Madeleine board members and the McCanns' multi-millionaire backer, double glazing tycoon Brian Kennedy, would meet to discuss the contract (of Metodo 3) in February.
"It is a matter for the bankers and the fund to make the final decision," he said.
"We are paying Metodo 3 £50,000 a month so of course it is a subject of debate. The decision is as much with Brian as it is with the fund, which pays for Metodo 3's involvement."
-
So why did the PJ meet with Metodo3 operatives, and accept and act on information from them about the case instead of arresting them? That makes no sense if Metodo had been acting illegally.
Because the Guardia Civil asked them to after they gave a false assurance that they wouldn't disrupt the official investigation. You see M3 are liars and crooks.
-
Metodo knew they were on shaky ground...
On 19 October 2007, Alberto Carbas, the head of the Spanish CID Anti-Kidnapping Unit (Unidad de Secuestros de la Policia Judicial) contacted the PJ and asked detectives in charge of Madeleine's investigation it they were willing to have a meeting with a representative from Metodo 3 and a Spanish police officer from the same unit.
The purpose of the meeting was to give the PJ some information those detectives had. The Spanish police officer made clear that Metodo 3 had no intention of interfering in the Portuguese police work, but only to transmit some useful information. In the same contact, Metodo 3 said that they were not working for the McCanns, but for Brian Kennedy.
On November 13, 2007, the meeting took place, in Portimão. Two PJ detectives – Ricardo Paiva and Paulo Ferreira. - the director of Metodo 3, Mr. Francisco Marco, an adviser from the private detectives company, Mr. António Jimenez (former head of Police Anti-Kidnapping Unit from Catalonia) and Mr. Brian Kennedy participated in the meeting.
The two PJ detectives submitted a report, about the meeting, the information exchanged and the investigations, following the leads given by Metodo 3.
On the report, which is in the DVD files, it's referred that Mr. Kennedy stressed, just as the meeting started, that his only intent was a charitable one, because he was concerned with cases related with child neglect and missing children. He stated that his concern, in that specific case, was only the truth and nothing more than the truth, irrespective if the McCanns, their friends or any other person was involved or suspect.
So if M3 were working for Kennedy how does it follow that the McCanns were breaking the law
-
Reminds me of a worm on a hook, all that wriggling. Bottom line is the thread title is absolutely spot on, KMcC knew employing private investigators to work in a criminal case in Portugal was against the law but did it anyway. Gosh, you will be suggesting next that Metodo 3 were a law unto themselves and did it all without the McCanns knowing about it. That dear friends is the real fantasy. 8(0(*
Worm on a hook... I would say that this accusation is of no importance whatsoever...
-
So if M3 were working for Kennedy how does it follow that the McCanns were breaking the law
Down the long snake back into square one my dears.
Who were the parties to the contract?
Well Metodo3 on the one part but who was the other party?. Do we actually know?
-
So if M3 were working for Kennedy how does it follow that the McCanns were breaking the law
Best ask Kate as she appeared to be under the impression that Metodo was working for them. It makes no difference in any event as it was the McCanns who were giving the orders.
And anyone who thinks the McCanns weren't wholly involved in the decision making really need to wake up imo.
-
Best ask Kate as she appeared to be under the impression that Metodo was working for them. It makes no difference in any event as it was the McCanns who were giving the orders.
And anyone who thinks the McCanns weren't wholly involved in the decision making really need to wake up imo.
it makes a hell of a lot of difference
-
I'm sure that both SY and the PJ are planning the best time to arrest the McCanns
-
If we are to accept that Kate McCann has told the truth then we have to accept that Método 3 were working for them regardless of who set it up initially. What is known for sure is that the Madeleine Fund paid Método 3 a hell of a lot of money for their services and the McCanns are both directors of that Company.
Our first investigators, the Spanish company Método 3, began working for us in October.
-
Metodo knew they were on shaky ground...
On 19 October 2007, Alberto Carbas, the head of the Spanish CID Anti-Kidnapping Unit (Unidad de Secuestros de la Policia Judicial) contacted the PJ and asked detectives in charge of Madeleine's investigation it they were willing to have a meeting with a representative from Metodo 3 and a Spanish police officer from the same unit.
The purpose of the meeting was to give the PJ some information those detectives had. The Spanish police officer made clear that Metodo 3 had no intention of interfering in the Portuguese police work, but only to transmit some useful information. In the same contact, Metodo 3 said that they were not working for the McCanns, but for Brian Kennedy.
On November 13, 2007, the meeting took place, in Portimão. Two PJ detectives – Ricardo Paiva and Paulo Ferreira. - the director of Metodo 3, Mr. Francisco Marco, an adviser from the private detectives company, Mr. António Jimenez (former head of Police Anti-Kidnapping Unit from Catalonia) and Mr. Brian Kennedy participated in the meeting.
The two PJ detectives submitted a report, about the meeting, the information exchanged and the investigations, following the leads given by Metodo 3.
On the report, which is in the DVD files, it's referred that Mr. Kennedy stressed, just as the meeting started, that his only intent was a charitable one, because he was concerned with cases related with child neglect and missing children. He stated that his concern, in that specific case, was only the truth and nothing more than the truth, irrespective if the McCanns, their friends or any other person was involved or suspect.
And who was Brian Kennedy working for? QED
Clearly Método 3 lied through their backsides to get a foothold in Portugal and used Marcos Correia to do their dirty work for them. All paid for of course by the Madeleine Fund.
-
I expect there is a way to simplify it.
But I'm damned if I can think how.
All ways up, bang-on right ...
-
My own view is that the Portuguese should open an investigation into Método 3's activities in Portugal and into what was clearly a conspiracy to undermine the justice system.
-
For as long as I have been following this case "sceptics" have been predicting the imminent arrest of the McCanns, usually the prediction is for about half a year hence, or it coincides with a Christian holiday like Easter. My bet is that the latest 'sceptiguestimate' for dawn raids on Rothley is Christmas 2014.
-
My own view is that the Portuguese should open an investigation into Método 3's activities in Portugal and into what was clearly a conspiracy to undermine the justice system.
You reckon? Give me a shout when they do. More chance of a piss up in a brewery, if you ask me.
PS. God knows what Portugal will do about Metodo3 before 2090. At which point we will all be dead. Roll on death. The end of this case is just too far away.
-
You reckon? Give me a shout when they do. More chance of a piss up in a brewery, if you ask me.
Now, back to Johny Mathis. Is he still alive, or am I yet again consigned to my lonely couch?
PS. God knows what Portugal will do about Metodo3 before 2090. At which point we will all be dead. Roll on death. The end of this case is just too far away.
The Spanish are dealing with them in the meantime Eleanor.
-
My own view is that the Portuguese should open an investigation into Método 3's activities in Portugal and into what was clearly a conspiracy to undermine the justice system.
I thought Metodo3 were now no longer as it were?
I find it astonishing the amount of funds that were splashed out on detectives who were not exactly out of the top drawer.
I would suggest "The Pinkerton's" (Securitas AB) would not have been more expensive overall and may have achieved more.
It does on one level have the appearance of people floundering out of their depth being deprived of their money. Then on another level it appears to be a concerted effort to cover tracks. There being proof of neither take your pick based on, what your life's experiences tell you is, the balance of probability?
-
The Spanish are dealing with them in the meantime Eleanor.
I wouldn't pay too much attention to those rumours, John. They have been on the boil for five years now.
-
It is a matter of record, I refer you to João Grade, the PJ inspectors and Correa himself.
So, who's idea was it to conspire to undermine the PT justice system, in your view?
-
It is a matter of record, I refer you to João Grade, the PJ inspectors and Correa himself.
As threads have a tendency to jump about, could you provide links please, John?
-
I thought Metodo3 were now no longer as it were?
I find it astonishing the amount of funds that were splashed out on detectives who were not exactly out of the top drawer.
I would suggest "The Pinkerton's" (Securitas AB) would not have been more expensive overall and may have achieved more.
It does on one level have the appearance of people floundering out of their depth being deprived of their money. Then on another level it appears to be a concerted effort to cover tracks. There being proof of neither take your pick based on, what your life's experiences tell you is, the balance of probability?
Francisco Marco has taken to writing books now. His latest offering.
(http://i.imgur.com/ytO2j25.png?1)
-
As threads have a tendency to jump about, could you provide links please, John?
I'm sure you will find it all by Googling the characters previously mentioned.
-
Proof the Kennedy/Metodo3 were working in Portugal while the investigation was still live.
From the Timesonline by Steven Swinford on May 4th 2008.
"Brian Kennedy, the home improvements tycoon backing the McCanns, admitted yesterday that he flew to Portugal last November and spent an evening with Robert Murat, apart from the McCanns the only other official suspect. A source close to Kennedy said he was "gathering information".
Kennedy's lawyer, Ed Smethurst, approached Murat through a mutual friend and said that Kennedy wanted to offer him a job.
But the job offer never transpired. Kennedy spent the evening with Murat and his lawyers at his aunt's house in Praia da Luz, discussing Madeleine's disappearance.
He left with a "flea in his ear" after being confronted over reports that Metodo 3, the McCanns' private investigators, had suspicions about Murat."
-
how can anyone criticise a mother for doing everything she can to find her lost child?
-
how can anyone criticise a mother for doing everything she can to find her lost child?
As long as it is within the law, technically or otherwise.
-
As long as it is within the law, technically or otherwise.
??? You wouldn't break the law in order to find your missing child? Interesting...
-
??? You wouldn't break the law in order to find your missing child? Interesting...
So you are advocating breaking the law.
Mmmm......
-
As long as it is within the law, technically or otherwise.
but you support torture of a suspect...which is not within the law
-
The Spanish are dealing with them in the meantime Eleanor.
Is this what you are referring to John?
"McCanns former detectives, Método 3, arrested for illegal spying"
http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2013/02/mccanns-former-detectives-metodo-3.html
-
Francisco Marco has taken to writing books now. His latest offering.
(http://i.imgur.com/ytO2j25.png?1)
He seems qualified enough to do so if my Google translate is working properly ...
Quote
Francisco Marco Fernandez (Barcelona , 1972 ) , director of the detective agency Method 3 , SA during the last twenty years , studied law degree and extent of private research. Later, he received his doctorate in Criminal Law with a thesis on private detectives and the right to privacy .
He has a master's degree in corporate law and has written numerous articles on doctrinal private detectives and Spanish law.
-
??? You wouldn't break the law in order to find your missing child? Interesting...
I'm glad you agree the McCanns broke Portuguese law Alfred by employing private contractors to undertake a parallel investigation. As Kate states in her book though it was only a TECHNICAL BREACH. That'll be alright then!!
-
I'm sure we discussed this some time ago, but what exactly did anyone do that was illegal?
-
I'm sure we discussed this some time ago, but what exactly did anyone do that was illegal?
I'm going to be charitable tonight Carana and just say its all there in the previous posts.
-
I'm sure we discussed this some time ago, but what exactly did anyone do that was illegal?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1564121/Madeleine-McCann-police-fury-over-private-hunt.html
The above is what was reported in a well known right wing rag.
-
So you are advocating breaking the law.
Mmmm......
I think the stock answer is "well everyone does it".
-
I think the stock answer is "well everyone does it".
Is that the one from the Urban Dictionary ?
Doing a Mc***n ? &%+((£
-
I thought everyone here would do anything to find their missing daughter. Or is that everyone except The McCanns?
-
I'm glad you agree the McCanns broke Portuguese law Alfredo by employing private contractors to undertake a parallel investigation. As Kate states in her book though it was only a TECHNICAL BREACH. That'll be alright then!!
Please answer my question and don't put words in my mouth. Many thanks.
-
Is that the one from the Urban Dictionary ?
Doing a Mc***n ? &%+((£
Nah thass something Alice bootlegged from somewhere.
This is an urban dictionary effort: "To blame everyone else for your errors for the purpose of 'damage limitation'".
It's a bit of a shame Spitting Image is no more.
-
I thought everyone here would do anything to find their missing daughter. Or is that everyone except The McCanns?
Incredible isn't it? How often have we been told by McCann critics that they would have stopped at nothing to find their missing child, nothing that is except dare upset their beloved PJ..,.
-
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1564121/Madeleine-McCann-police-fury-over-private-hunt.html
The above is what was reported in a well known right wing rag.
Thanks, that rings a faint bell, but I don't recall coming to any conclusion about it and it was quite some time ago.
How can private investigations be illegal if there is no legislation concerning the principle?
I can understand that some of the methods that investigators may use could well be illegal - e.g., phone tapping, the results of which would have no value in a court of law anyway; and that some actions could actually hinder an investigation, thus obstructing it.
But I don't see how the concept of trying to discover information that could help an investigation and is duly passed on to the official team would be illegal as such, otherwise everyone interested in the case could come under that broad category.
-
I'm going to be charitable tonight Carana and just say its all there in the previous posts.
That's kind of you Angelo. The thread is only a year and a half old after all.
-
I thought everyone here would do anything to find their missing daughter. Or is that everyone except The McCanns?
How far does "do anything" extend ?.
-
How far does "do anything" extend ?.
I'd kill if necessary.
-
How far does "do anything" extend ?.
I don't know. Crawling around PdL on their hands and knees? Knocking on doors and demanding entry? Sitting in the Police Station and refusing to leave?
What would be your preferred choice?
-
I'd kill if necessary.
If you did it the wrong country you might get your neck stretched for your efforts. As long as you are prepared for the long drop without screaming foul that's OK.
-
I don't know. Crawling around PdL on their hands and knees? Knocking on doors and demanding entry? Sitting in the Police Station and refusing to leave?
What would be your preferred choice?
So within the law then?
Me ? I am an all round a-moral nasty piece of work so I would probably go a lot farther but only in a very cold calculated manner. Red haze stuff is so naff.
removed surplus word @)(++(*
This board is a stunner it converts a-moral without the hyphen into Amaral. wtf
-
The hypocrisy is quite astounding, it's ok for Kate to admit to technically breaking the law but not for Gonçalo Amaral to do it.
-
What is relevant then?
That you think you are prepared to kill under the circumstances of your daughter being kidnapped?
What I would do or not do is irrelevant to the topic of this thread. What is relevant is that for years the McCanns who have been criticised for not moving heaven and earth to find their daughter by people who claim they themselves would have ripped PdL apart with their bare hands are now being criticised by these same critics for allegedly breaking the law by hiring PIs to find their daughter. That is the relevant factor here as far as I'm concerned. Doubtless you heartily couldn't give a toss.
-
The hypocrisy is quite astounding, it's ok for Kate to admit to technically breaking the law but not for Gonçalo Amaral to do it.
Are you comparing the McCanns alleged technical law-breaking in an effort to find their missing 4 year old daughter with Amaral's conviction for covering up torture? Seriously??
-
What I would do or not do is irrelevant to the topic of this thread. What is relevant is that for years the McCanns who have been criticised for not moving heaven and earth to find their daughter by people who claim they themselves would have ripped PdL apart with their bare hands are now being criticised by these same critics for allegedly breaking the law by hiring PIs to find their daughter. That is the relevant factor here as far as I'm concerned. Doubtless you heartily couldn't give a toss.
No one forced you to respond to a question I posed to Eleanor, but you did so. From that one would conclude you thought it was relevant and on topic at that point. You said you would be prepared to kill but do not now wish to debate the point you raised.
-
What I would do or not do is irrelevant to the topic of this thread. What is relevant is that for years the McCanns who have been criticised for not moving heaven and earth to find their daughter by people who claim they themselves would have ripped PdL apart with their bare hands are now being criticised by these same critics for allegedly breaking the law by hiring PIs to find their daughter. That is the relevant factor here as far as I'm concerned. Doubtless you heartily couldn't give a toss.
Personally, I find this point highly relevant.
I have already messaged the McCanns, through their preferred communication channel, to offer them information and assistance in the search for Madeleine.
To date, I have had no response. Please take your pick why. I am sure they get hundreds or thousands of nutters who sound much like me (I am NOT a nutter!) that probably go straight into their trash can.
If OG shuts down, I will be happy to work alongside a McCann PI team. Let me break that down into tiny pieces. Alongside does not mean for. It does not mean reporting in to. It means outside of, though the focus is the same.
Let's try PI's within Portugal, which as far as I know, are 100% illegal. I have zero interest in breaking the law here, so getting involved in an illegal investigation is a non-starter.
However, working ALONGSIDE PIs who are WORKING OUTSIDE OF Portugal is both legal and feasible. Plus a lot more on top.
It can all be done. The key question is - will it?
-
Maybe they didn't respond because they don't need your help in finding Madeleine. I think you should tell them that you know everything about important sightings of Madeleine that could help with their wider agenda. From a nutter to getting on their star chart 8(0(*
-
Are you comparing the McCanns alleged technical law-breaking in an effort to find their missing 4 year old daughter with Amaral's conviction for covering up torture? Seriously??
The Law is the Law is the Law... Nobody is above it, not Gonçalo Amaral in his haste to find a missing Joana nor Kate McCann in her haste to find Madeleine. You either have laws which EVERYONE obeys or you have anarchy. Why will it be?
Was Gonçalo Amaral any more guilty because he altered a few police records than the McCanns were for employing private investigators contrary to Portuguese Law? I dare anyone to claim the high moral ground on that one!
-
Thanks, that rings a faint bell, but I don't recall coming to any conclusion about it and it was quite some time ago.
How can private investigations be illegal if there is no legislation concerning the principle?
I can understand that some of the methods that investigators may use could well be illegal - e.g., phone tapping, the results of which would have no value in a court of law anyway; and that some actions could actually hinder an investigation, thus obstructing it.
But I don't see how the concept of trying to discover information that could help an investigation and is duly passed on to the official team would be illegal as such, otherwise everyone interested in the case could come under that broad category.
I knew you would ask that question years later so here is the same answer.
To clarify, commissioning a private investigation into criminal activities in Portugal whilst an official investigation is live constitutes an act of obstruction punishable under the Portuguese Penal Code.
Antonio Martins, president of the National Association of Portuguese Judges, told the newspaper 24 Horas: "It is still up to the state to carry out criminal investigation. That kind of activity has no legal standing.
"Anything that results from private investigation has no substance."
Mr Martins said the private detectives and even the McCanns themselves could be accused of "obstruction of justice".
Carlos Anjos, the head of Portugal's criminal police federation, added: "This can only be another diversion tactic from the McCanns. It is nothing but folklore.
"Portugal does not have legislation in this area. Private detectives who intervene in criminal cases cannot exist.
"The law only tolerates private detectives who gather information and only about matters of the private lives of certain people like extramarital relationships."
A separate police source warned that the involvement of investigators may not only be illegal but could have a detrimental effect on the inquiry.
The high ranking official told newspaper Correio da Manha: "If private investigators come here they will be running a serious risk of being arrested."
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1564121/Madeleine-McCann-police-fury-over-private-hunt.html
-
Personally, I find this point highly relevant.
I have already messaged the McCanns, through their preferred communication channel, to offer them information and assistance in the search for Madeleine.
To date, I have had no response. Please take your pick why. I am sure they get hundreds or thousands of nutters who sound much like me (I am NOT a nutter!) that probably go straight into their trash can.
If OG shuts down, I will be happy to work alongside a McCann PI team. Let me break that down into tiny pieces. Alongside does not mean for. It does not mean reporting in to. It means outside of, though the focus is the same.
Let's try PI's within Portugal, which as far as I know, are 100% illegal. I have zero interest in breaking the law here, so getting involved in an illegal investigation is a non-starter.
However, working ALONGSIDE PIs who are WORKING OUTSIDE OF Portugal is both legal and feasible. Plus a lot more on top.
It can all be done. The key question is - will it?
Our esteemed Moderator Holly on the Jeremy Bamber board is an avid Bamber supporter but got exactly the same response when she offered to fund tests in his defence. She also got no response to a recent invitation to both him and his campaign team to take part in a friendly debate. Why she even bothers is beyond me?
Unless you are donating a pile of cash or are a notable person of sorts I fear a response will be a long time a coming.
-
No one forced you to respond to a question I posed to Eleanor, but you did so. From that one would conclude you thought it was relevant and on topic at that point. You said you would be prepared to kill but do not now wish to debate the point you raised.
correct, no one is obliged to enter into a debate with you, and on this occasion I chose not to. Glad that's mutually understood.
-
Personally, I find this point highly relevant.
I have already messaged the McCanns, through their preferred communication channel, to offer them information and assistance in the search for Madeleine.
To date, I have had no response. Please take your pick why. I am sure they get hundreds or thousands of nutters who sound much like me (I am NOT a nutter!) that probably go straight into their trash can.
If OG shuts down, I will be happy to work alongside a McCann PI team. Let me break that down into tiny pieces. Alongside does not mean for. It does not mean reporting in to. It means outside of, though the focus is the same.
Let's try PI's within Portugal, which as far as I know, are 100% illegal. I have zero interest in breaking the law here, so getting involved in an illegal investigation is a non-starter.
However, working ALONGSIDE PIs who are WORKING OUTSIDE OF Portugal is both legal and feasible. Plus a lot more on top.
It can all be done. The key question is - will it?
Unless you have a track record of success in the field of investigative work I'm sure the McCanns will view your offers of help as nothing more than well-meaning but misguided at best, and at worst...well you said it above.
-
I found this -
"They can now focus on the work of Metodo 3 who are using all their significant resources across several countries. It's illegal for them to work in Portugal, and their investigation is separate from the official police inquiry, but has been approved by the local detectives and all information will be passed on to them."
I'd remembered reading that they had to pass everything they found onto the PJ, they said they even followed them.
-
-
I knew you would ask that question years later so here is the same answer.
To clarify, commissioning a private investigation into criminal activities in Portugal whilst an official investigation is live constitutes an act of obstruction punishable under the Portuguese Penal Code.
Antonio Martins, president of the National Association of Portuguese Judges, told the newspaper 24 Horas: "It is still up to the state to carry out criminal investigation. That kind of activity has no legal standing.
"Anything that results from private investigation has no substance."
Mr Martins said the private detectives and even the McCanns themselves could be accused of "obstruction of justice".
Carlos Anjos, the head of Portugal's criminal police federation, added: "This can only be another diversion tactic from the McCanns. It is nothing but folklore.
"Portugal does not have legislation in this area. Private detectives who intervene in criminal cases cannot exist.
"The law only tolerates private detectives who gather information and only about matters of the private lives of certain people like extramarital relationships."
A separate police source warned that the involvement of investigators may not only be illegal but could have a detrimental effect on the inquiry.
The high ranking official told newspaper Correio da Manha: "If private investigators come here they will be running a serious risk of being arrested."
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1564121/Madeleine-McCann-police-fury-over-private-hunt.html
Thanks, John, Alice had already kindly given me the link to that... which is actually what I based my comment on.
-
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=4676.msg174803#msg174803
-
Right. I've now been through the thread and no one has been able to provide a cite from the 2007 Penal Code yet stating anything other than what I've already mentioned.
Certain practices by anyone are clearly illegal, e.g.:
CAPÍTULO VII
Dos crimes contra a reserva da vida privada
Artigo 190.o
Violação de domicílio ou perturbação da vida privada
1 - Quem, sem consentimento, se introduzir na habitação de outra pessoa ou nela permanecer depois de intimado a retirar-se é punido com pena de prisão até 1 ano ou com pena de multa até 240 dias.
2 - Na mesma pena incorre quem, com intenção de perturbar a vida privada, a paz e o sossego de outra pessoa, telefonar para a sua habitação ou para o seu telemóvel.
3 - Se o crime previsto no n.o 1 for cometido de noite ou em lugar ermo, por meio de violência ou ameaça de violência, com uso de arma ou por meio de arrombamento, escalamento ou chave falsa, ou por três ou mais pessoas, o agente é punido com pena de prisão até 3 anos ou com pena de multa.
Artigo 191.o
Introdução em lugar vedado ao público
Quem, sem consentimento ou autorização de quem de direito, entrar ou permanecer em pátios, jardins ou espaços vedados anexos a habitação, em barcos ou outros meios de transporte, em lugar vedado e destinado a serviço ou a empresa públicos, a serviço de transporte ou ao exercício de profissões ou actividades, ou em qualquer outro lugar vedado e não livremente acessível ao público, é punido com pena de prisão até 3 meses ou com pena de multa até 60 dias.
Artigo 192.o
Devassa da vida privada
1 - Quem, sem consentimento e com intenção de devassar a vida privada das pessoas, designadamente a intimidade da vida familiar ou sexual:
93
ASSEMBLEIA DA REPÚBLICA
a) Interceptar, gravar, registar, utilizar, transmitir ou divulgar conversa, comunicação telefónica, mensagens de correio electrónico ou facturação detalhada;
a) Captar, fotografar, filmar, registar ou divulgar imagem das pessoas ou de objectos ou espaços íntimos;
b) Observar ou escutar às ocultas pessoas que se encontrem em lugar privado; ou
c) Divulgar factos relativos à vida privada ou a doença grave de outra pessoa;
é punido com pena de prisão até 1 ano ou com pena de multa até 240 dias.
2 - O facto previsto na alínea d) do número anterior não é punível quando for praticado como meio adequado para realizar um interesse público legítimo e relevante.
Artigo 193.o
Devassa por meio de informática
1 - Quem criar, mantiver ou utilizar ficheiro automatizado de dados individualmente identificáveis e referentes a convicções políticas, religiosas ou filosóficas, à filiação partidária ou sindical, à vida privada, ou a origem étnica, é punido com pena de prisão até 2 anos ou com pena de multa até 240 dias.
2 - A tentativa é punível.
Artigo 194.o
Violação de correspondência ou de telecomunicações
1 - Quem, sem consentimento, abrir encomenda, carta ou qualquer outro escrito que se encontre fechado e lhe não seja dirigido, ou tomar conhecimento, por processos técnicos, do seu conteúdo, ou impedir, por qualquer modo, que seja recebido pelo destinatário, é punido com pena de prisão até 1 ano ou com pena de multa até 240 dias.
2 - Na mesma pena incorre quem, sem consentimento, se intrometer no conteúdo de telecomunicação ou dele tomar conhecimento.
3 - Quem, sem consentimento, divulgar o conteúdo de cartas, encomendas, escritos fechados, ou telecomunicações a que se referem os números anteriores, é punido com pena de prisão até 1 ano ou com pena de multa até 240 dias.
94
ASSEMBLEIA DA REPÚBLICA
Artigo 195.o
Violação de segredo
Quem, sem consentimento, revelar segredo alheio de que tenha tomado conhecimento em razão do seu estado, ofício, emprego, profissão ou arte é punido com pena de prisão até 1 ano ou com pena de multa até 240 dias.
Artigo 196.o
Aproveitamento indevido de segredo
Quem, sem consentimento, se aproveitar de segredo relativo à actividade comercial, industrial, profissional ou artística alheia, de que tenha tomado conhecimento em razão do seu estado, ofício, emprego, profissão ou arte, e provocar deste modo prejuízo a outra pessoa ou ao Estado, é punido com pena de prisão até 1 ano ou com pena de multa até 240 dias.
Artigo 197.o
Agravação
As penas previstas nos artigos 190.o a 195.o são elevadas de um terço nos seus limites mínimo e máximo se o facto for praticado:
a) Para obter recompensa ou enriquecimento, para o agente ou para outra pessoa, ou para causar prejuízo a outra pessoa ou ao Estado; ou
b) Através de meio de comunicação social.
CAPÍTULO III
Dos crimes contra a realização da justiça
Artigo 359.o
Falsidade de depoimento ou declaração
1 - Quem prestar depoimento de parte, fazendo falsas declarações relativamente a factos sobre os quais deve depor, depois de ter prestado juramento e de ter sido advertido das consequências penais a que se expõe com a prestação de depoimento falso, é punido com pena de prisão até 3 anos ou com pena de multa.
2 - Na mesma pena incorrem o assistente e as partes civis relativamente a declarações que prestarem em processo penal, bem como o arguido relativamente a declarações sobre a identidade e os antecedentes criminais.
Artigo 360.o
Falsidade de testemunho, perícia, interpretação ou tradução
1 - Quem, como testemunha, perito, técnico, tradutor ou intérprete, perante tribunal ou funcionário competente para receber como meio de prova, depoimento, relatório, informação ou tradução, prestar depoimento, apresentar relatório, der informações ou fizer traduções falsos, é punido com pena de prisão de 6 meses a 3 anos ou com pena de multa não inferior a 60 dias.
2 - Na mesma pena incorre quem, sem justa causa, se recusar a depor ou a apresentar relatório, informação ou tradução.
3 - Se o facto referido no n.o 1 for praticado depois de o agente ter prestado juramento e ter sido advertido das consequências penais a que se expõe, a pena é de prisão até 5 anos ou de multa até 600 dias.
Artigo 361.o Agravação
165
ASSEMBLEIA DA REPÚBLICA
1 - As penas previstas nos artigos 359.o e 360.o são agravadas de um terço nos seus limites mínimo e máximo se:
a) O agente actuar com intenção lucrativa;
b) Do facto resultar demissão de lugar, perda de posição profissional ou
destruição das relações familiares ou sociais de outra pessoa; ou
c) Do facto resultar que, em vez do agente, outra pessoa seja condenada pelo crime que aquele praticou.
2 - Se das condutas descritas nos artigos 359.o ou 360.o resultar privação da liberdade de uma pessoa, o agente é punido com pena de prisão de 1 a 8 anos.
I could probably dig out a few more if anyone is really interested.
-
correct, no one is obliged to enter into a debate with you, and on this occasion I chose not to. Glad that's mutually understood.
You raised the subject of how you would be prepared to kill not me.
So you raised it for mere effect.
-
You raised the subject of how you would be prepared to kill not me.
So you raised it for mere effect.
He wouldn't let it lie.
-
You raised the subject of how you would be prepared to kill not me.
So you raised it for mere effect.
You did ask.
-
You did ask.
Perhaps in an effort to assuage Alice's curiosity about why I would kill in order to find my missing child, we could take this to PM?? I'll await Alice's message and will be happy to discuss it that way so as not to take this thread off-topic.
-
Right. I've now been through the thread and no one has been able to provide a cite from the 2007 Penal Code yet stating anything other than what I've already mentioned.
Try attempting to pervert the course of justice Portuguese equivalent and you won't be far away. The experts in Portuguese law did state there is no place for a private criminal investigation in Portugal.
-
Unless you have a track record of success in the field of investigative work I'm sure the McCanns will view your offers of help as nothing more than well-meaning but misguided at best, and at worst...well you said it above.
Your opinion of the McCanns opinion is pure speculation.
I have not offered to participate in an investigation. Please do not suggest that I have, as it has been made clear this might mean I could be subjected to scrutiny in Portugal regarding interference in an on-going police operation.
I have done no such thing.
I have offered to get anyone, whether on Team McCann or otherwise, up to speed on Luz. My first taker will be here in the next few weeks. (And no investigating will be done.) The alternative is that Team McCann does what OG has done, which in essence has been to play remote detective from Belgravia.
-
Try attempting to pervert the course of justice Portuguese equivalent and you won't be far away. The experts in Portuguese law did state there is no place for a private criminal investigation in Portugal.
By Portuguese Registered Private Investigators.
-
By Portuguese Registered Private Investigators.
I have never seen the point in employing Oakley or Metodo since neither had any jurisdiction in Portugal.
-
They must have had something that appealed to the McCanns and their backers.
-
I have never seen the point in employing Oakley or Metodo since neither had any jurisdiction in Portugal.
I haven't found anything illegal, per se, in attempting to find your missing child, although perhaps you don't agree.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=4676.msg303324#msg303324
-
They must have had something that appealed to the McCanns and their backers.
i remember from years ago ....that metedo were more intersted in racking up any dirt on G. A.....than looking for maddie ....that could have been why they were employed...remembering ...all there underhanded ways ..that could have been the attraction
-
i remember from years ago ....that metedo were more intersted in racking up any dirt on G. A.....than looking for maddie ....that could have been why they were employed...remembering ...all there underhanded ways ..that could have been the attraction
Don't know about that.
But you're bound to concede.
There's plenty of dirt to dig.
-
I haven't found anything illegal, per se, in attempting to find your missing child, although perhaps you don't agree.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=4676.msg303324#msg303324
You are entitled to your opinion however learned and qualified Portuguese opinion was to the contrary. You will find that Portuguese laws have developed much since the days of the rightwing dictatorships. What has become crystal over the last eight years is that the police and judiciary do not like outsiders meddling in their internal affairs. The regime might have gone from power but the undercurrents remain.
-
I have never seen the point in employing Oakley or Metodo since neither had any jurisdiction in Portugal.
That applies to Scotland Yard too. Whatever they have will have to be approved and accepted by the Portuguese authorities to be progressed, I imagine.
-
You are entitled to your opinion however learned and qualified Portuguese opinion was to the contrary. You will find that Portuguese laws have developed much since the days of the rightwing dictatorships. What has become crystal over the last eight years is that the police and judiciary do not like outsiders meddling in their internal affairs.
We've been through all this, too.
Portuguese law allows private investigation, in parallel with official Portuguese investigation, provided the private investigators don't encroach onto Portuguese territory.
It's all plainly stated in Kate's book.
-
You are entitled to your opinion however learned and qualified Portuguese opinion was to the contrary.
According to which statutes?
If any of our native Portuguese speakers feel inclined to provide an accurate translation of the potential infringements that I have taken the time to find above...
-
By Portuguese Registered Private Investigators.
More specifically, investigation on Portuguese soil, no matter who by, in conjunction with an official PJ investigation into the same matter, is prohibited by Portuguese law.
That's why the McCanns kept their investigators off Portuguese soil.
-
We've been through all this, too.
Portuguese law allows private investigation, in parallel with official Portuguese investigation, provided the private investigators don't encroach onto Portuguese territory.
It's all plainly stated in Kate's book.
The primary issue is to avoid obstructing the course of justice.
I have no problem with that, on the contrary.
-
The primary issue is to avoid obstructing the course of justice.
I have no problem with that, on the contrary.
Agreed.
-
You are entitled to your opinion however learned and qualified Portuguese opinion was to the contrary. You will find that Portuguese laws have developed much since the days of the rightwing dictatorships. What has become crystal over the last eight years is that the police and judiciary do not like outsiders meddling in their internal affairs. The regime might have gone from power but the undercurrents remain.
I have looked through the 2007 Penal Code.
Which statutes back in 2007 do you find incompatible with private attempts to find your missing child?
-
I have also dug out potential areas in which a private investigation could stray into illegal territory.
Perhaps someone could help provide an accurate translation.
-
We've been through all this, too.
Portuguese law allows private investigation, in parallel with official Portuguese investigation, provided the private investigators don't encroach onto Portuguese territory.
It's all plainly stated in Kate's book.
In that case both you and Kate are mistaken. What do you call intimidating witnesses and making up wild claims about sightings etc ??
I would just love to see the Metropolitan Police reaction if some cowboy outfit from Barcelona came into one of their high profile crime investigations. Your claim is absurd ferryman but then so many are.
ps good to see you back from the naughty chair.
-
More specifically, investigation on Portuguese soil, no matter who by, in conjunction with an official PJ investigation into the same matter, is prohibited by Portuguese law.
That's why the McCanns kept their investigators off Portuguese soil.
Was Correia and the Arade Dam fiasco on Portuguese soil?
-
I have also dug out potential areas in which a private investigation could stray into illegal territory.
Perhaps someone could help provide an accurate translation.
I have read the sections you posted earlier, and I can see nothing that explicitly states that one cannot investigate, whether there is an active Portuguese police investigation or not.
However, most of the stuff does mean that someone HIRED to investigate, would, by virtue of their profession, be opening themselves up to multiple risks of prosecution.
The first sanity check on this is - do private investigators actually exist within Portugal? The second is - if PI's do exist, precisely what services do they advertise?
I cannot for the life of me see why one would employ PIs in Spain re an investigation in Portugal if one could employ Portuguese-based PIs.
-
Was Correia and the Arade Dam fiasco on Portuguese soil?
Correia was never employed by the McCanns.
http://portugalresident.com/divers-restart-search-for-madeleine-in-arade-dam
(sic)
.The divers’ search of the waters at the Arade Dam started on Monday in a private operation commissioned by the Madeira-based lawyer Marcos Aragão Correia and sponsored by a Portimão-based company named SPEC.
-
I have looked through the 2007 Penal Code.
Which statutes back in 2007 do you find incompatible with private attempts to find your missing child?
The Penal Code won't be that specific but Antonio Martins, president of the National Association of Portuguese Judges, told the newspaper 24 Horas: "It is still up to the state to carry out criminal investigation. That kind of private activity has no legal standing".
"Anything that results from private investigation has no substance."
Mr Martins said the private detectives and even the McCanns themselves could be accused of "obstruction of justice".
Carlos Anjos, the head of Portugal's criminal police federation, added: "This can only be another diversion tactic from the McCanns. It is nothing but folklore.
"Portugal does not have legislation in this area. Private detectives who intervene in criminal cases cannot exist.
"The law only tolerates private detectives who gather information and only about matters of the private lives of certain people like extramarital relationships."
A separate police source warned that the involvement of investigators may not only be illegal but could have a detrimental effect on the inquiry.
The high ranking official told newspaper Correio da Manha: "If private investigators come here they will be running a serious risk of being arrested."
They were arrested in any event, Halligen from Oakley and Marco from Metodo 3. Both companies are now defunct, bankrupt, bust. Karma works in mysterious ways imo.
-
The Penal Code won't be that specific but Antonio Martins, president of the National Association of Portuguese Judges, told the newspaper 24 Horas: "It is still up to the state to carry out criminal investigation. That kind of private activity has no legal standing".
"Anything that results from private investigation has no substance."
Mr Martins said the private detectives and even the McCanns themselves could be accused of "obstruction of justice".
Carlos Anjos, the head of Portugal's criminal police federation, added: "This can only be another diversion tactic from the McCanns. It is nothing but folklore.
"Portugal does not have legislation in this area. Private detectives who intervene in criminal cases cannot exist.
"The law only tolerates private detectives who gather information and only about matters of the private lives of certain people like extramarital relationships."
A separate police source warned that the involvement of investigators may not only be illegal but could have a detrimental effect on the inquiry.
The high ranking official told newspaper Correio da Manha: "If private investigators come here they will be running a serious risk of being arrested."
They were arrested in any event, Halligen from Oakley and Marco from Metodo 3.
"The Penal Code won't be that specific" Are you sure about that?
As Carlos Anjos said: ""Portugal does not have legislation in this area." If it doesn't have legislation in that area, how can the principle be illegal?
-
The Penal Code won't be that specific but Antonio Martins, president of the National Association of Portuguese Judges, told the newspaper 24 Horas: "It is still up to the state to carry out criminal investigation. That kind of private activity has no legal standing".
"Anything that results from private investigation has no substance."
Mr Martins said the private detectives and even the McCanns themselves could be accused of "obstruction of justice".
Carlos Anjos, the head of Portugal's criminal police federation, added: "This can only be another diversion tactic from the McCanns. It is nothing but folklore.
"Portugal does not have legislation in this area. Private detectives who intervene in criminal cases cannot exist.
"The law only tolerates private detectives who gather information and only about matters of the private lives of certain people like extramarital relationships."
A separate police source warned that the involvement of investigators may not only be illegal but could have a detrimental effect on the inquiry.
The high ranking official told newspaper Correio da Manha: "If private investigators come here they will be running a serious risk of being arrested."
They were arrested in any event, Halligen from Oakley and Marco from Metodo 3. Both companies are now defunct, bankrupt, bust. Karma works in mysterious ways imo.
Key words: come here.
If they don't, Portuguese officialdom has no choice but to butt out ....
-
I have read the sections you posted earlier, and I can see nothing that explicitly states that one cannot investigate, whether there is an active Portuguese police investigation or not.
However, most of the stuff does mean that someone HIRED to investigate, would, by virtue of their profession, be opening themselves up to multiple risks of prosecution.
The first sanity check on this is - do private investigators actually exist within Portugal? The second is - if PI's do exist, precisely what services do they advertise?
I cannot for the life of me see why one would employ PIs in Spain re an investigation in Portugal if one could employ Portuguese-based PIs.
I can find nothing that would indicate that anyone whose means of finding information is legal and providing that all such information is duly transmitted in the entirety to the authorities, is any way illegal.
If, for instance, you had means to count how many manholes were potentially open during the ongoing public works at the time in PdL... is that illegal?
-
"The Penal Code won't be that specific" Are you sure about that?
As Carlos Anjos said: ""Portugal does not have legislation in this area." If it doesn't have legislation in that area, how can the principle be illegal?
I think most are agreed that employing private contractors to investigate a crime (assuming there ever was one) which was perpetrated on Portuguese soil was a bit of a cheek especially when the McCanns had just had their arguido or official suspect status lifted for lack of evidence. Kate was correct to state it was illegal because it is illegal and was seen as obstructing justice.
-
I think most are agreed that employing private contractors to investigate a crime (assuming there ever was one) which was perpetrated on Portuguese soil was a bit of a cheek especially when the McCanns had just had their arguido or official suspect status lifted for lack of evidence. Kate was correct to state it was illegal because it is illegal and was seen as obstructing justice.
You (just about!) stay within bounds of fact until your final sentence.
The McCanns did nothing illegal.
-
I think most are agreed that employing private contractors to investigate a crime (assuming there ever was one) which was perpetrated on Portuguese soil was a bit of a cheek especially when the McCanns had just had their arguido or official suspect status lifted for lack of evidence. Kate was correct to state it was illegal because it is illegal and was seen as obstructing justice.
I have taken the time to find potential articles in the 2007 penal code.... There doesn't seem to be much interest.
-
The Penal Code won't be that specific but Antonio Martins, president of the National Association of Portuguese Judges, told the newspaper 24 Horas: "It is still up to the state to carry out criminal investigation. That kind of private activity has no legal standing".
"Anything that results from private investigation has no substance."
Mr Martins said the private detectives and even the McCanns themselves could be accused of "obstruction of justice".
Carlos Anjos, the head of Portugal's criminal police federation, added: "This can only be another diversion tactic from the McCanns. It is nothing but folklore.
"Portugal does not have legislation in this area. Private detectives who intervene in criminal cases cannot exist.
"The law only tolerates private detectives who gather information and only about matters of the private lives of certain people like extramarital relationships."
A separate police source warned that the involvement of investigators may not only be illegal but could have a detrimental effect on the inquiry.
The high ranking official told newspaper Correio da Manha: "If private investigators come here they will be running a serious risk of being arrested."
They were arrested in any event, Halligen from Oakley and Marco from Metodo 3. Both companies are now defunct, bankrupt, bust. Karma works in mysterious ways imo.
Alpha wotsit was dissolved in July 2011. So that's a prile.
-
I can find nothing that would indicate that anyone whose means of finding information is legal and providing that all such information is duly transmitted in the entirety to the authorities, is any way illegal.
If, for instance, you had means to count how many manholes were potentially open during the ongoing public works at the time in PdL... is that illegal?
You can't pick and choose the tasks Carana. The McCanns should have stayed in Portugal and assisted the official investigation instead of hightailing it out at the first opportunity. They let Madeleine down and they let themselves down by their actions.
-
I have taken the time to find potential articles in the 2007 penal code.... There doesn't seem to be much interest.
Which Article covers attempting to pervert the course of justice?
-
Alpha wotsit was dissolved in July 2011. So that's a prile.
That was a crock from the start.
-
You can't pick and choose the tasks Carana. The McCanns should have stayed in Portugal and assisted the official investigation instead of hightailing it out at the first opportunity. They let Madeleine down and they let themselves down by their actions.
That doesn't answer my question. Which statute in the 2007 Penal Code prohibits anyone from providing information to an investigation, within the laws of the land?
-
You can't pick and choose the tasks Carana. The McCanns should have stayed in Portugal and assisted the official investigation instead of hightailing it out at the first opportunity. They let Madeleine down and they let themselves down by their actions.
Were there no flights between Portugal and Britain between early May 2007 and early September then?
-
I think most are agreed that employing private contractors to investigate a crime (assuming there ever was one) which was perpetrated on Portuguese soil was a bit of a cheek especially when the McCanns had just had their arguido or official suspect status lifted for lack of evidence. Kate was correct to state it was illegal because it is illegal and was seen as obstructing justice.
Did you see this Angelo -
"They can now focus on the work of Metodo 3 who are using all their significant resources across several countries. It's illegal for them to work in Portugal, and their investigation is separate from the official police inquiry, but has been approved by the local detectives and all information will be passed on to them."
Seems as though they had ok'd it with the detectives in Portugal and they passed on all that they discovered.
-
Which Article covers attempting to pervert the course of justice?
Any help?
CAPÍTULO III
Dos crimes contra a realização da justiça
An interesting chapter...
If you search up, you might notice that I've posted numerous articles that might be illegal for anyone.
-
You can't pick and choose the tasks Carana. The McCanns should have stayed in Portugal and assisted the official investigation instead of hightailing it out at the first opportunity. They let Madeleine down and they let themselves down by their actions.
Angelo - you stated earlier tat "The Penal Code won't be that specific". The whole point of having a civil law system is that it is codified and therefore WILL be specific. So if it ain't in the code it does not exist. The penal and civil codes codes in Portugal are in effect a comprehensive rule book.
The following article from Find Law UK provides a brief outline of the differences and may help underline the differences..
Civil law systems
The origins of European civil law can be traced back to the sixth century Byzantine / East Roman Empire and the Code of Justinian — or, to give it its Latin name, the ‘corpus juris civilis’ which means ‘body of civil law’. The aim of this Code — and all of its descendants — was to harmonise the law and iron out any contradictions; essentially, to provide an accessible and written rulebook for universal application.
A standard code is a voluminous collection of statutes arranged by subject matter. Since it is the primary source of law, courts in a civil law system are usually inquisitorial rather than adversarial, not bound by precedent, and usually presided over by career judges who play a limited role in interpreting the law.
Common law systems
The common law system has its origins in 11th and 12th century England. Its name derives from the efforts of Henry II to institutionalise the common law by establishing a unified legal system that would become ‘common’ throughout the land.
So what are the constituents of this common law? Well, judicial decisions essentially, rather than legislation or executive acts.
But the common law is far more than just judge-made law. The underlying assumption of the common law is courts are bound to follow the same reasoning applied in past cases, which has so-called ‘precedential weight’. Moreover, as the court system developed a hierarchy over the centuries, the decisions of higher courts (e.g., the Supreme Court, Court of Appeal, etc) gradually gained greater weight of authority than lower courts and tribunals.
Where a court encounters a case unlike any other it has previously decided, it is free to reach its own mind on what the law should be, thereby creating precedent which will bind future courts.
The other main differences between common law and civil law systems are the absence of career judges and the adversarial nature of proceedings. In a common law system, judges tend to be senior lawyers who are called to the bench after many years practicing the law. Moreover, the judge plays a far less active and dominant role in proceedings. He or she merely interprets the law and ensures the trial is conducted fairly. Judges in common law jurisdictions have no investigatory function, unlike in civil law systems
-
Try attempting to pervert the course of justice Portuguese equivalent and you won't be far away. The experts in Portuguese law did state there is no place for a private criminal investigation in Portugal.
the article John quoted said that the investigators COULD be charged with obstruction....not WOULD....so far it seems threre is still no confirmation that a private investigtion would be illegal.
-
That doesn't answer my question. Which statute in the 2007 Penal Code prohibits anyone from providing information to an investigation, within the laws of the land?
Anyone can provide information to the Portuguese cops Carana but interference with an official investigation is a no no.
-
Were there no flights between Portugal and Britain between early May 2007 and early September then?
Funny you should mention flights, was that an attempt at humour? ?{)(**
Gerry certainly was on the verge of fleeing if Kate's account in her book is to be believed.
-
Did you see this Angelo -
"They can now focus on the work of Metodo 3 who are using all their significant resources across several countries. It's illegal for them to work in Portugal, and their investigation is separate from the official police inquiry, but has been approved by the local detectives and all information will be passed on to them."
Seems as though they had ok'd it with the detectives in Portugal and they passed on all that they discovered.
Quote from?
-
Anyone can provide information to the Portuguese cops Carana but interference with an official investigation is a no no.
collecting information is not interfering with the investigation
-
Angelo - you stated earlier tat "The Penal Code won't be that specific". The whole point of having a civil law system is that it is codified and therefore WILL be specific.
When I stated specific I thought that you would understand that this related to interference in a missing child enquiry. I can't see the Portuguese statues specifically relating to a bunch of Yahoo's from Barcelona, or am I mistaken?
-
You can't pick and choose the tasks Carana. The McCanns should have stayed in Portugal and assisted the official investigation instead of hightailing it out at the first opportunity. They let Madeleine down and they let themselves down by their actions.
you need to add IMO...you have no right to dictate to the mccanns what they should and shouldn't do...imo the mccanns had no choice but to leave portugal
-
the article John quoted said that the investigators COULD be charged with obstruction....not WOULD....so far it seems threre is still no confirmation that a private investigtion would be illegal.
If it conflicts with the official one it is very illegal.
-
collecting information is not interfering with the investigation
Making up stories and scaring off potential witnesses is. So is intimidating poor Moroccan families and pressurizing Irishmen.
-
Anyone can provide information to the Portuguese cops Carana but interference with an official investigation is a no no.
I agree, but what does "interference" mean?
Does that include information passed on by UK law enforcement, in case it was of any relevance, do you think?
It was, after all, GA's eruption to someone in the media (his wife's friend, according to him) over the latest bit of potentially helpful information passed on by the UK (for whatever it was worth), that led to him being taken off the case.
-
If it conflicts with the official one it is very illegal.
who said anything about conflicting...so are you now saying if it doesn't conflict it is legal
-
Making up stories and scaring off potential witnesses is. So is intimidating poor Moroccan families and pressurizing Irishmen.
again in your opinion but the FACT is those actions took place outside portugal and not under the jurisdiction of portuguese law
-
When I stated specific I thought that you would understand that this related to interference in a missing child enquiry. I can't see the Portuguese statues specifically relating to a bunch of Yahoo's from Barcelona, or am I mistaken?
The national penal code of Portugal applies to and governs activity in Portugal, just as the national penal codes of all countries govern activity in the country the penal code applies to.
There can be jurisdiction, centrally administered, applicable to several countries (as in EU law) or in several states of one country (as in American Federal law).
But in Portugal, broadly, so long as outside investigators don't encroach onto Portuguese territory, they can (separately) investigate a matter in conjunction with the PJ, and simultaneously with a PJ investigation.
-
The national penal code of Portugal applies to and governs activity in Portugal, just as the national penal codes of all countries govern activity in the country the penal code applies to.
There can be jurisdiction, centrally administered, applicable to several countries (as in EU law) or in several states of one country (as in American Federal law).
But in Portugal, broadly, so long as outside investigators don't encroach onto Portuguese territory, they can (separately) investigate a matter in conjunction with the PJ, and simultaneously with a PJ investigation.
so was Mrs Murat breaking the law...of course she wasn't...I think some posters are confused
-
again in your opinion but the FACT is those actions took place outside portugal and not under the jurisdiction of portuguese law
That's the concise version ....
-
Funny you should mention flights, was that an attempt at humour? ?{)(**
Gerry certainly was on the verge of fleeing if Kate's account in her book is to be believed.
No, it was not an attempt at humour. You stated that the McCanns scarpered from Portugal at the earliest available opportunity. That would have presumably been the day after Madeleine vanished, and every other day thereafter. Clearly therefore they did NOT take the first opportunity to leave Portugal, and instead stayed there for months allowing the PJ ample time to investigate them thoroughly and to attempt to build a case against them.
-
so was Mrs Murat breaking the law...of course she wasn't...I think some posters are confused
Interesting question ....
-
No, it was not an attempt at humour. You stated that the McCanns scarpered from Portugal at the earliest available opportunity. That would have presumably been the day after Madeleine vanished, and every other day thereafter. Clearly therefore they did NOT take the first opportunity to leave Portugal, and instead stayed there for months allowing the PJ ample time to investigate them thoroughly and to attempt to build a case against them.
some peopel seem unwilling to move forward.....there are several very good reasons why the McCanns left portugal but posters want to pretend none exist
-
Quote from?
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id76.html
-
some peopel seem unwilling to move forward.....there are several very good reasons why the McCanns left portugal but posters want to pretend none exist
Key point (that even some moderators don't seem to want to acknowledge): The McCanns left Portugal with the agreement of the PJ.
There was no question of them trying to 'flee justice'.
They couldn't, even if they'd wanted to, other than, possibly, by fleeing Europe.
If Portugal had wanted the McCanns to return to Portugal to stand trial for anything, they could have raised an European Arrest Warrant (if the McCanns had refused to return voluntarily).
As it was, the Portuguese prosecutors reviewed the 'evidence' and recognised (at least those parts of it accusing the McCanns) as a pile of crock ....
-
again in your opinion but the FACT is those actions took place outside portugal and not under the jurisdiction of portuguese law
Some did agreed but they still impacted the official investigation. Far from progressing the case all Oakley and M3 achieved was broken promises and alienated potential witnesses.
-
again in your opinion but the FACT is those actions took place outside portugal and not under the jurisdiction of portuguese law
No, not in my opinion but fact. We all know what happened to little Bushra whose parents were made to look like child traffickers. We know that Martin Smith was pressurised to tone down his identification of Gerry McCann. We know there were false sightings reported in order to justify the huge sums being paid to PI's.
All of it was one big fat lie. I won't even mention the conspiracy to destroy the lead detective Amaral which was funded by M3 and fronted by Marcos Correia. All of which was in turn paid for by Kennedy and the McCanns on the pretence they were searching for Madeleine. They must think were stupid or all least f...ing tossers to have swallowed such total crap.
-
Key point (that even some moderators don't seem to want to acknowledge): The McCanns left Portugal with the agreement of the PJ.
There was no question of them trying to 'flee justice'.
They couldn't, even if they'd wanted to, other than, possibly, by fleeing Europe.
If Portugal had wanted the McCanns to return to Portugal to stand trial for anything, they could have raised an European Arrest Warrant (if the McCanns had refused to return voluntarily).
As it was, the Portuguese prosecutors reviewed the 'evidence' and recognised (at least those parts of it accusing the McCanns) as a pile of crock ....
Stop splitting hairs ferryman. Kate admitted in her book that Gerry was on the verge of fleeing the moment arguido was mentioned. Agreed in the end they stayed and did leave with the PJ's nod but that doesn't make it right. They went home but at least one of them should have returned to progress matters and encourage the PJ to pursue their investigation anew. This is what bothers most people, the fact that they never did do any searches in Portugal.
Final point, they couldn't even be bothered to go back and assist with a police reconstruction so returning voluntarily as defendants is an open to speculation.
-
No, not in my opinion but fact. We all know what happened to little Bushra whose parents were made to look like child traffickers. We know that Martin Smith was pressurised to tone down his identification of Gerry McCann. We know there were false sightings reported in order to justify the huge sums being paid to PI's.
All of it was one big fat lie. I won't even mention the conspiracy to destroy the lead detective Amaral which was funded by M3 and fronted by Marcos Correia. All of which was in turn paid for by Kennedy and the McCanns on the pretence they were searching for Madeleine. They must think were fcuking stupid or all least fcuking tossers to have swallowed such total crap.
I'll just pick you up on this one,...what evidence do you have that smith was pressurised to tone down his ID...you need to provide a cite...you won't be able to...are you now simply making things up
-
Key point (that even some moderators don't seem to want to acknowledge): The McCanns left Portugal with the agreement of the PJ.
There was no question of them trying to 'flee justice'.
They couldn't, even if they'd wanted to, other than, possibly, by fleeing Europe.
If Portugal had wanted the McCanns to return to Portugal to stand trial for anything, they could have raised an European Arrest Warrant (if the McCanns had refused to return voluntarily).
As it was, the Portuguese prosecutors reviewed the 'evidence' and recognised (at least those parts of it accusing the McCanns) as a pile of crock ....
Their lease was at an end and they'd negotiated an extension to stay on there to be present for the arguido interviews...
-
I can find nothing that would indicate that anyone whose means of finding information is legal and providing that all such information is duly transmitted in the entirety to the authorities, is any way illegal.
If, for instance, you had means to count how many manholes were potentially open during the ongoing public works at the time in PdL... is that illegal?
The sections you posted cover an awful lot of crimes, such as entering the property/land of a person without permission. And worse still if you are asked to leave and fail to do so promptly.
There are significant restrictions on what one individual can ask of a second individual, and passing that on to the authorities would not absolve you of guilt.
There is a yet higher level of restriction if you do this in a professional capacity.
So I, as a private individual not a professional investigator, would get more lee way than a PI, albeit still with a raft of no-go areas.
I cannot see how investigative journalists (professionals) could make much progress and remain legal in Portugal.
The constitution enshrines the right to discuss any case in Portugal, but judicial secrecy would restrict that to information in the public domain.
I see Mrs Murat's effort has gotten a mention. There was nothing to stop her inviting people to voluntarily pass information to her. That's discussing. If she investigated, she probably broke the law. If she shared any of several items of information with Robert, I would say the police could have made a case against her. Of course, at the time, police energies were directed elsewhere.
Wandering round Luz, counting manholes, and/or discussing known facts would not be problematical.
However, if I were to track down John Hill (easy on a number of fronts) then obviously anything covered in his witness statement is off-limits, as are enquiries about how the OG interview was conducted and which questions were asked. Effectively, this makes him useless as a source of information at this time.
-
No, not in my opinion but fact. We all know what happened to little Bushra whose parents were made to look like child traffickers. We know that Martin Smith was pressurised to tone down his identification of Gerry McCann. We know there were false sightings reported in order to justify the huge sums being paid to PI's.
All of it was one big fat lie. I won't even mention the conspiracy to destroy the lead detective Amaral which was funded by M3 and fronted by Marcos Correia. All of which was in turn paid for by Kennedy and the McCanns on the pretence they were searching for Madeleine. They must think were fcuking stupid or all least fcuking tossers to have swallowed such total crap.
well said ....absolutely spot on............... 8@??)(
this is there problem now .....those that have not swallowed it
all that matters to them now ....is the fund ....money etc...etc ..to pay the lawyers ......to keep there head above water ....for now
-
I'll just pick you up on this one,...what evidence do you have that smith was pressurised to tone down his ID...you need to provide a cite...you won't be able to...are you now simply making things up
Perhaps Angelo is, ahem, 'reinterpreting' that part of Martin Smith's statement where he said that, before making his statement to the Irish Gardia police, he canvassed the opinions of his whole family, with him that night, and that all his children disagreed with him (that the man was Gerry), including his daughter, Aofe, (at least of those witnesses whose statements we read on line), for me, far the most observant witness of what the Smiths all saw that night.
It was on that basis that I, for a long time, believed it might have been Aofe who produced the second e-fit.
But in fact, it was Mr Smith's wife ....
-
Perhaps Angelo is, ahem, 'reinterpreting' that part of Martin Smith's statement where he said that, before making his statement to the Irish Gardia police, he canvassed the opinions of his whole family, with him that night, and that all his children disagreed with him (that the man was Gerry), including his daughter, Aofe, (at least of those witnesses whose statements we read on line), for me, far the most observant witness of what the Smiths all saw that night.
It was on that basis that I, for a long time, believed it might have been Aofe who produced the second e-fit.
But in fact, it was Mr Smith's wife ....
No doubt this has been covered before and is deep in the bowels of the forum.
But how is it known who produced the second e-fit?
-
The sections you posted cover an awful lot of crimes, such as entering the property/land of a person without permission. And worse still if you are asked to leave and fail to do so promptly.
There are significant restrictions on what one individual can ask of a second individual, and passing that on to the authorities would not absolve you of guilt.
There is a yet higher level of restriction if you do this in a professional capacity.
So I, as a private individual not a professional investigator, would get more lee way than a PI, albeit still with a raft of no-go areas.
I cannot see how investigative journalists (professionals) could make much progress and remain legal in Portugal.
The constitution enshrines the right to discuss any case in Portugal, but judicial secrecy would restrict that to information in the public domain.
I see Mrs Murat's effort has gotten a mention. There was nothing to stop her inviting people to voluntarily pass information to her. That's discussing. If she investigated, she probably broke the law. If she shared any of several items of information with Robert, I would say the police could have made a case against her. Of course, at the time, police energies were directed elsewhere.
Wandering round Luz, counting manholes, and/or discussing known facts would not be problematical.
However, if I were to track down John Hill (easy on a number of fronts) then obviously anything covered in his witness statement is off-limits, as are enquiries about how the OG interview was conducted and which questions were asked. Effectively, this makes him useless as a source of information at this time.
From what I can gather, what's illegal is to obstruct an investigation * (yet to find, but it must exist somewhere in the code) or to invade anyone's privacy without their prior agreement.
* Including anything that doesn't uphold the presumption of innocence, which may be frowned upon more these days than it was in the past.
-
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id76.html
Are you for real Lace?
Do you expect anyone to believe a story from a defunct discredited former rag called The News of the World which made just about ecverything up as they went along.
-
I'll just pick you up on this one,...what evidence do you have that smith was pressurised to tone down his ID...you need to provide a cite...you won't be able to...are you now simply making things up
So you think he simply changed his mind about his observation? The facts are that Mr Smith was so adamant that the man he encountered that night back in Praia da Luz was Gerry McCann that he contacted his local Guarda station who took a statement from him. They in turn contacted the Portuguese police who arranged for Mr Smith, Peter and Aoife to travel back to Portugal to make formal statements.
Next thing we know is that Brian Kennedy acting on behalf of the McCanns made contact with Mr Smith back in Drogheda in the Irish Republc and attempted to get him to do e-fits, he refused. This is where it gets interesting. What we had in effect was an agent acting on behalf of the McCanns approaching an eye witness who had identified Gerry McCann as a suspect. Now if that isn't interference with a live criminal investigation then I don't know what is?
Even later, another attempt is made by agents acting on behalf of the McCanns to get Mr Smith to cooperate in producing e-fits of the man he encountered. This agent was conman Kevin Halligen who was then providing his PI services under the banner of Red Defence International, later to become Oakley International, a Company which he set up specifically to service the Find Madeleine contract.
Halligen later admitted that he did manage to obtain e-fits from the Smith family, one of which was a remarkable likeness to Gerry McCann. These e-fits were not immediately made available to any police agency and were not released to the public for several years. In an interview with the London Times, Halligen claimed that Oakley had provided a report of their investigations which was highly critical of the McCanns but was prevented from releasing it due to a confidentiality clause within his contract.
And Mr Smith has never been heard of ever again. Says it all really??
-
So you think he simply changed his mind about his observation? The facts are that Mr Smith was so adamant that the man he encountered that night back in Praia da Luz was Gerry McCann that he contacted his local Guarda station who took a statement from him. They in turn contacted the Portuguese police who arranged for Mr Smith, Peter and Aoife to travel back to Portugal to make formal statements.
Next thing we know is that Brian Kennedy acting on behalf of the McCanns had made contact with Mr Smith back in Drogheda in the Irish Republc and attempted to get him to do e-fits, he refused. This is where it gets interesting. What we had in effect was an agent acting on behalf of the McCanns approaching an eye witness who had identified Gerry McCann as a suspect. Now if that isn't interference with a live criminal investigation then I don't know what is?
Even later, another attempt is made by agents acting on behalf of the McCanns to get Mr Smith to cooperate in producing e-fits of the man he encountered. This agent was conman Kevin Halligen who was then providing his PI services under the banner of Red Defence International, later to become Oakley International, a Company which he set up specifically to service the Find Madeleine contract.
The fact of the matter is that based upon a quick sighting on TV of the way that Gerry was holding Sean as he descended from the plane, it jogged Mr Smiths memory. Mr Smith was anxious to do his duty and decided to report the way Gerry held Sean and how it was like the way that Smithman held the little girl.
None of the Smith family thought that Gerry looked like Smithman at all. He was out on a limb, but at least he reported what he thought that he should.
Amaral grasped hold of it. But, did he change the emphasis? Cos I think that later Mr Smith made it plain that he did not think Gerry was Smithman. Please correct me if I am wrong.
-
Cos I think that later Mr Smith made it plain that he did not think Gerry was Smithman. Please correct me if I am wrong.
Thank you, exactly my point. Nite nite
-
(snip)Amaral grasped hold of it. But, did he change the emphasis?(snip)
Mr Amaral certainly did act on Mr Smith's Sept 2007 identification - Mr Amaral immediately planned to fly the witness to portugal for formal identification by photograph, when suddenly he was removed from the investigation on Oct 2nd 2007 due to pressure from high up in the UK gov.
-
Has anyone ever wondered who the so-called "anonymous benefactor" was who paid expensive PIs to go to Luz in May 2007? Those PIs where working in coordination with LP/PJ in May 2007 - no private benefactor could have arranged that could they?
-
So you think he simply changed his mind about his observation? The facts are that Mr Smith was so adamant that the man he encountered that night back in Praia da Luz was Gerry McCann that he contacted his local Guarda station who took a statement from him. They in turn contacted the Portuguese police who arranged for Mr Smith, Peter and Aoife to travel back to Portugal to make formal statements.
Next thing we know is that Brian Kennedy acting on behalf of the McCanns made contact with Mr Smith back in Drogheda in the Irish Republc and attempted to get him to do e-fits, he refused. This is where it gets interesting. What we had in effect was an agent acting on behalf of the McCanns approaching an eye witness who had identified Gerry McCann as a suspect. Now if that isn't interference with a live criminal investigation then I don't know what is?
Even later, another attempt is made by agents acting on behalf of the McCanns to get Mr Smith to cooperate in producing e-fits of the man he encountered. This agent was conman Kevin Halligen who was then providing his PI services under the banner of Red Defence International, later to become Oakley International, a Company which he set up specifically to service the Find Madeleine contract.
Halligen later admitted that he did manage to obtain e-fits from the Smith family, one of which was a remarkable likeness to Gerry McCann. These e-fits were not immediately made available to any police agency and were not released to the public for several years. In an interview with the London Times, Halligen claimed that Oakley had provided a report of their investigations which was highly critical of the McCanns but was prevented from releasing it due to a confidentiality clause within his contract.
And Mr Smith has never been heard of ever again. Says it all really??
so it is just your opinion that smith was pressurised into changing his story....you have provided no evidence...smith admitted he did not even see the mans face...how could he have recognised him...as a mod you should not quote opinion as fact
-
Perhaps Angelo is, ahem, 'reinterpreting' that part of Martin Smith's statement where he said that, before making his statement to the Irish Gardia police, he canvassed the opinions of his whole family, with him that night, and that all his children disagreed with him (that the man was Gerry), including his daughter, Aofe, (at least of those witnesses whose statements we read on line), for me, far the most observant witness of what the Smiths all saw that night.
It was on that basis that I, for a long time, believed it might have been Aofe who produced the second e-fit.
But in fact, it was Mr Smith's wife ....
Do you have a cite for "all his children disagreed with him"?
-
So you think he simply changed his mind about his observation? The facts are that Mr Smith was so adamant that the man he encountered that night back in Praia da Luz was Gerry McCann that he contacted his local Guarda station who took a statement from him. They in turn contacted the Portuguese police who arranged for Mr Smith, Peter and Aoife to travel back to Portugal to make formal statements.
Next thing we know is that Brian Kennedy acting on behalf of the McCanns made contact with Mr Smith back in Drogheda in the Irish Republc and attempted to get him to do e-fits, he refused. This is where it gets interesting. What we had in effect was an agent acting on behalf of the McCanns approaching an eye witness who had identified Gerry McCann as a suspect. Now if that isn't interference with a live criminal investigation then I don't know what is?
Even later, another attempt is made by agents acting on behalf of the McCanns to get Mr Smith to cooperate in producing e-fits of the man he encountered. This agent was conman Kevin Halligen who was then providing his PI services under the banner of Red Defence International, later to become Oakley International, a Company which he set up specifically to service the Find Madeleine contract.
Halligen later admitted that he did manage to obtain e-fits from the Smith family, one of which was a remarkable likeness to Gerry McCann. These e-fits were not immediately made available to any police agency and were not released to the public for several years. In an interview with the London Times, Halligen claimed that Oakley had provided a report of their investigations which was highly critical of the McCanns but was prevented from releasing it due to a confidentiality clause within his contract.
And Mr Smith has never been heard of ever again. Says it all really??
he wasn't adamant...he said he didn't see his face......he never used the word adamant...opinion as fact again
-
From Kate McCann's book two -
Our first investigators the Spanish company Metodo 3, began working for us in October. With private investigations technically illegal in Portugal, we felt the closest we would get would be a firm from somewhere on the Iberian Peninsula which would have the advantage of familiarity with local systems, culture and geography and the best network of contacts in the region. M3 also had links to the Spanish police, who, in turn had good connections with the Portuguese police. end of quote.
So you see they did ok it with the Portuguese police, all information they collected as they said was handed over to the PJ.
-
Do you have a cite for "all his children disagreed with him"?
After seeing the BBC news at 10 PM, footage on the 9th September 2007 I contacted Leicestershire police with this information. During that time I spoke to all my family members who were with me on the night of 3rd May 2007 about this and the only one who felt the same way as me was my wife. She had seen the video clip of Gerard McCann walking down the stairs of the plane earlier that day. We did not discuss this until some days later. This statement has been read over to me and is correct.
Martin Smith.
-
After seeing the BBC news at 10 PM, footage on the 9th September 2007 I contacted Leicestershire police with this information. During that time I spoke to all my family members who were with me on the night of 3rd May 2007 about this and the only one who felt the same way as me was my wife. She had seen the video clip of Gerard McCann walking down the stairs of the plane earlier that day. We did not discuss this until some days later. This statement has been read over to me and is correct.
Martin Smith.
Right, so it doesn't say they thought it wasn't Gerry and can equally apply if they did not see him clearly. Glad that is cleared up.
-
Right, so it doesn't say they thought it wasn't Gerry and can equally apply if they did not see him clearly. Glad that is cleared up.
It does.
They all thought differently (from Martin Smith) apart from his wife.
Only Martin Smith (and his wife) thought it was Gerry.
As you say, cleared up.
-
From Kate McCann's book two -
Our first investigators the Spanish company Metodo 3, began working for us in October. With private investigations technically illegal in Portugal, we felt the closest we would get would be a firm from somewhere on the Iberian Peninsula which would have the advantage of familiarity with local systems, culture and geography and the best network of contacts in the region. M3 also had links to the Spanish police, who, in turn had good connections with the Portuguese police. end of quote.
So you see they did ok it with the Portuguese police, all information they collected as they said was handed over to the PJ.
Only when it suited. In any event don't believe everything you read in a book authored by a suspect.
-
It does.
They all thought differently (from Martin Smith) apart from his wife.
Only Martin Smith (and his wife) thought it was Gerry.
As you say, cleared up.
Have ou read the statements?
-
Have ou read the statements?
Yes.
-
Back to my original point, initially he was so convinced of what he saw and after interference by McCann agents it got watered down. In any country that is called interfering with a material witness and comes with a penalty. I only wish Martin Smith would set the record straight here and now and tell us exactly what went on. Now there's a challenge to him!!
-
Back to my original point, initially he was so convinced of what he saw and after interference by McCann agents it got watered down. In any country that is called interfering with a material witness and comes with a penalty. I only wish Martin Smith would set the record straight here and now and tell us exactly what went on. Now there's a challenge to him!!
you have absolutely no evidence that any of this is true and continue to post opinion as fact to the detriment of the forum...
the real fact is that smith could not identify teh man he saw as he didn't see his face
-
Only when it suited. In any event don't believe everything you read in a book authored by a suspect.
The detectives weren't arrested or even stopped when they were investigating, what does that tell you.
I certainly don't believe everything Amaral wrote in his book.
-
you have absolutely no evidence that any of this is true and continue to post opinion as fact to the detriment of the forum...
the real fact is that smith could not identify teh man he saw as he didn't see his face
He identified him by his manner of carrying the child;
He states it was like watching an action replay of the night he saw the male carrying the child back in Portugal. He states the way Gerry was carrying his twin triggered something in his head. It was exactly the same way and look of the male seen the night Maddie went missing . He also watched ITV news and Sky news and inferred it looked like the same person both times carrying the children.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_SMITH.htm
-
Back to my original point, initially he was so convinced of what he saw and after interference by McCann agents it got watered down. In any country that is called interfering with a material witness and comes with a penalty. I only wish Martin Smith would set the record straight here and now and tell us exactly what went on. Now there's a challenge to him!!
What do you mean by "initially"? It only occurred to him that it might have been Gerry when he saw the news coverage of how Sean was held when Gerry walked down the plane steps, just after they'd been made arguidos, no less.
As I and others have posted numerous times before, there is a body of research into "false memories" generated by the mind attempting to reprocess new "information". That doesn't mean that a "flash memory" is always inaccurate, but officers aware of the phenomenon and trained in how to explore it further with a witness would be far more competent than officers who aren't.
-
He identified him by his manner of carrying the child;
He states it was like watching an action replay of the night he saw the male carrying the child back in Portugal. He states the way Gerry was carrying his twin triggered something in his head. It was exactly the same way and look of the male seen the night Maddie went missing . He also watched ITV news and Sky news and inferred it looked like the same person both times carrying the children.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_SMITH.htm
Thats right..so he didnt see his face...how good an ID is that...it is laughable
-
Snip
As I and others have posted numerous times before, there is a body of research into "false memories" generated by the mind attempting to reprocess new "information". That doesn't mean that a "flash memory" is always inaccurate, but officers aware of the phenomenon and trained in how to explore it further with a witness would be far more competent than officers who aren't.
I agree with you, however if we start to discount evidence that may be subject to "false memories" in this case, I'm not sure what would be left.
-
I agree with you, however if we start to discount evidence that may be subject to "false memories" in this case, I'm not sure what would be left.
all witness statements are subject to it...to a certain extent...but posters want to base their conclusions on minute detail...risible
-
all witness statements are subject to it...to a certain extent...but posters want to base their conclusions on minute detail...risible
From both sides...
-
I agree with you, however if we start to discount evidence that may be subject to "false memories" in this case, I'm not sure what would be left.
Hopefully, the officers currently investigating the case have far more training and information to make progress than armchair detectives.
The fact that the general public is not being given constant updates on a live investigation into a disappearance that took place in a country attempting to reign in media leaks doesn't mean that that there has been no progress, even if the end result turns out to be simply eliminating question marks and keep remaining red flags on hold pending a future breakthrough that can be more easily be quickly cross-referenced.
Edited for clarification.
-
(Angelo):
initially [Martin Smith] was so convinced of what he saw and after interference by McCann agents it got watered down.
Cite for interference by McCann agents, please ....
-
(Angelo):
initially [Martin Smith] was so convinced of what he saw and after interference by McCann agents it got watered down.
Cite for interference by McCann agents, please ....
It is a matter of record that first Kennedy and then Halligen made it their business to challenge Smith and what he had already officially recorded in respect of his observation. You can wriggle and squirm as much as you like but until such time as Martin Smith reveals what pressure he was subjected to then that is all we know.
-
you have absolutely no evidence that any of this is true and continue to post opinion as fact to the detriment of the forum...
the real fact is that smith could not identify teh man he saw as he didn't see his face
Well the e-fits which the Irish witnesses (according to Halligen) produced would prove you wrong yet again.
-
Thats right..so he didnt see his face...how good an ID is that...it is laughable
Mrs Smith saw it sufficiently so that she asked him a question.
-
It is a matter of record that first Kennedy and then Halligen made it their business to challenge Smith and what he had already officially recorded in respect of his observation. You can wriggle and squirm as much as you like but until such time as Martin Smith reveals what pressure he was subjected to then that is all we know.
It's a matter of record that Brian Kennedy aksed Martin Smith to produce an e-fit.
Martin Smith declined.
All the time Martin Smith thought the man he and his family all saw was Gerry, he would decline.
That is common sense.
Then Martin Smith changed his mind and agreed to produce an e-fit.
That would be because he had decided, on the strength of the files, that he had been wrong to conclude the man was Gerry.
Amaral's 'smoking-gun' exploded in his own face ....
-
It's a matter of record that Brian Kennedy aksed Martin Smith to produce an e-fit.
Martin Smith declined.
All the time Martin Smith thought the man he and his family all saw was Gerry, he would decline.
That is common sense.
Then Martin Smith changed his mind and agreed to produce an e-fit.
That would be because he had decided, on the strength of the files, that he had been wrong to conclude the man was Gerry.
Amaral's 'smoking-gun' exploded in his own face ....
What possible information contained within the files could lead Martin Smith to change his mind? Unlike you or I he saw this man first hand and regardless of the disinformation and organised propaganda which followed he is stuck with that original experience. Martin Smith has never publicly stated that he has changed his mind which in itself is somewhat revealing.
Touché
-
What possible information contained within the files could lead Martin Smith to change his mind? Unlike you or I he saw this man first hand and regardless of the disinformation and organised propaganda which followed he is stuck with that original experience. Martin Smith has never publicly stated that he has changed his mind which in itself is somewhat revealing.
Touché
You obviously haven't read the files.
I'll warrant Martin Smith has.
The Times lost a libel action against the McCanns when its Insight team (so-called!) screwed up on this very point
-
From both sides...
Of course
-
You obviously haven't read the files.
I'll warrant Martin Smith has.
The Times lost a libel action against the McCanns when its Insight team (so-called!) screwed up on this very point
Prove it!
-
Prove it!
What, that The Times lost the libel trial?
If I still had my subscription to The Times, I would.
But I don't.
-
Thats right..so he didnt see his face...how good an ID is that...it is laughable
The height, hairstyle and build matched. The manner of carrying the child matched. The child was sleeping deeply with it's arms by it's sides. He has never come forward to be identified. The question is do you have to see a face to identify someone? Many innocent men have been chosen from police line-ups by witnesses looking at faces. When Smith saw GM on the news he saw an 'action replay' of what he saw on 3rd May. It was similar enough to trigger the memory of what he had seen previously.
-
What, that The Times lost the libel trial?
If I still had my subscription to The Times, I would.
But I don't.
I can agree to differ but as I posted earlier, only Martin Smith himself can clear this up so it is a pity the opportunity was lost. Maybe he will step up and go public yet?
-
I can agree to differ but as I posted earlier, only Martin Smith himself can clear this up so it is a pity the opportunity was lost. Maybe he will step up and go public yet?
We know from what Martin Smith has already revealed in the files that he was in disagreement with the whole party with him apart from his wife that the man was Gerry. That would have included Aofe, a very highly observant witness .....
-
The height, hairstyle and build matched. The manner of carrying the child matched. The child was sleeping deeply with it's arms by it's sides. He has never come forward to be identified. The question is do you have to see a face to identify someone? Many innocent men have been chosen from police line-ups by witnesses looking at faces. When Smith saw GM on the news he saw an 'action replay' of what he saw on 3rd May. It was similar enough to trigger the memory of what he had seen previously.
And how many more have been chosen by witnesses who never even got a clear look at their faces?
-
We know from what Martin Smith has already revealed in the files that he was in disagreement with the whole party with him apart from his wife that the man was Gerry. That would have included Aofe, a very highly observant witness .....
Reported statement.
A more reliable source would be Mr. Smith himself.
-
What, that The Times lost the libel trial?
If I still had my subscription to The Times, I would.
But I don't.
Does this help?
Readers should note that this article was pulled by the Sunday Times shortly after going to press and was replaced by a somewhat watered down version in The Times the following day.
On Sunday 29 December the Sunday Times printed a retraction and an apology for suggesting that the e-fits were suppressed for 5 years. They now claim that the e-fits were passed to police as early as October 2009 although they were created by Kevin Halligen and Oakley International in late 2007 or early 2008.
www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/comment/regulars/corrections/article1357081.ece
Sunday Times - paper edition 27 October 2013
Madeleine clues hidden for 5 years
(http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/multimedia/dynamic/00380/STN2704PIC3_380277k.jpg)
Madeleine disappeared from her parents holiday apartment in the
Portuguese resort of Praia da Luz on 3rd May 2007
THE critical new evidence at the centre of Scotland Yard’s search for Madeleine McCann was kept secret for five years after it was presented to her parents by ex-MI5 investigators.
The evidence was in fact taken from an intelligence report produced for Gerry and Kate McCann by a firm of former spies in 2008.
It contained crucial E-Fits of a man seen carrying a child on the night of Madeleine’s disappearance, which have only this month become public after he was identified as the prime suspect by Scotland Yard.
But the trail was left to go cold for five years because the McCanns and their advisers sidelined the report and threatened to sue its authors if they divulged the contents.
The report, seen by the Sunday Times, called for the E-Fits to be released immediately and said "anomalies" in statements by the McCanns and their friends must be resolved.
A source close to the McCanns said the report was considered “hypercritical of the people involved” and “would have been completely distracting” if made public.
[Page 4]
The new prime suspect was first singled out by detectives in 2008. Their findings were suppressed. Insight reports
The team of hand-picked former MI5 agents had been hired by Kate and Gerry McCann to chase a much-needed breakthrough in the search for their missing daughter Madeleine.
It was the spring of 2008, 10 months after the three-year-old had disappeared from the Portuguese resort of Praia da Luz, and the McCanns were beginning to despair over the handling of the local police investigation. They were relying on the new team to bring fresh hope.
But within months the relationship had soured. A report produced by the investigators was deemed “hypercritical” of the McCanns and their friends, and the authors were threatened with legal action if it was made public.
Its contents remained secret until Scotland Yard detectives conducting a fresh review of the case contacted the authors and asked for a copy.
They found that it contained new evidence about a key suspect seen carrying a child away from the McCanns’ holiday apartment on the night Madeleine disappeared.
This sighting is now considered the main lead in the investigation and E-Fits of the suspect, taken from the report, were the centrepiece of a Crimewatch appeal that attracted more than 2,400 calls from the public this month.
One of the investigators whose work was sidelined said last week he was “utterly stunned” when he watched the programme and saw the evidence his team had passed to the McCanns five years ago presented as a breakthrough.
The team of investigators from the security firm Oakley International were hired by the McCanns’ Find Madeleine fund, which bankrolled private investigations into the girl’s disappearance. They were led by Henri Exton, MI5’s former undercover operations chief.
Their report, seen by The Sunday Times, focused on a sighting by an Irish family of a man carrying a child at about 10pm on May 3, 2007, when Madeleine went missing.
An earlier sighting by one of the McCanns’ friends was dismissed as less credible after “serious inconsistencies” were found in her evidence. The report also raised questions about “anomalies” in the statements given by the McCanns and their friends.
Exton confirmed last week that the fund had silenced his investigators for years after they handed over their controversial findings. He said: “A letter came from their lawyers binding us to the confidentiality of the report.”
He claimed the legal threat had prevented him from handing over the report to Scotland Yard’s fresh investigation, until detectives had obtained written permission from the fund. A source close to the fund said the report was considered “hypercritical of the people involved” and “would have been completely distracting” if it became public.
Oakley’s six-month investigation included placing undercover agents inside the Ocean Club where the family stayed, lie detector tests, covert surveillance and a forensic re-examination of all existing evidence.
It was immediately clear that two sightings of vital importance had been reported to the police. Two men were seen carrying children near the apartments between 9pm, when Madeleine was last seen by Gerry, and 10pm, when Kate discovered her missing.
The first man was seen at 9.15pm by Jane Tanner, a friend of the McCanns, who had been dining with them at the tapas bar in the resort. She saw a man carrying a girl just yards from the apartment as she went to check on her children.
The second sighting was by Martin Smith and his family from Ireland, who saw a man carrying a child near the apartment just before 10pm.
The earlier Tanner sighting had always been treated as the most significant, but the Oakley team controversially poured cold water on her account.
Instead, they focused on the Smith sighting, travelling to Ireland to interview the family and produce E-Fits of the man they saw. Their report said the Smiths were “helpful and sincere” and concluded: “The Smith sighting is credible evidence of a sighting of Maddie and more credible than Jane Tanner’s sighting”. The evidence had been “neglected for too long” and an “overemphasis placed on Tanner”.
The new focus shifted the believed timeline of the abduction back by 45 minutes. The report, delivered to the McCanns in November 2008, recommended that the revised timeline should be the basis for future investigations and that the Smith E-Fits should be released without delay.
"The report questioned 'anomalies' in the McCanns' statements"
The potential abductor seen by the Smiths is now the prime suspect in Scotland Yard’s investigation, after detectives established that the man seen earlier by Tanner was almost certainly a father carrying his child home from a nearby night creche. The Smith E-Fits were the centrepiece of the Crimewatch appeal.
Investigators had E-Fits five years ago
One of the Oakley investigators said last week: “I was absolutely stunned when I watched the programme . . . It most certainly wasn’t a new timeline and it certainly isn’t a new revelation. It is absolute nonsense to suggest either of those things . . . And those E-Fits you saw on Crimewatch are ours,” he said.
The detailed images of the face of the man seen by the Smith family were never released by the McCanns. But an artist’s impression of the man seen earlier by Tanner was widely promoted, even though the face had to be left blank because she had only seen him fleetingly and from a distance.
Various others images of lone men spotted hanging around the resort at other times were also released.
Nor were the Smith E-Fits included in Kate McCann’s 2011 book, Madeleine, which contained a whole section on eight “key sightings” and identified those of the Smiths and Tanner as most “crucial”. Descriptions of all seven other sightings were accompanied by an E-Fit or artist’s impression. The Smiths’ were the only exception. So why was such a “crucial” piece of evidence kept under lock and key?
The relationship between the fund and Oakley was already souring by the time the report was submitted — and its findings could only have made matters worse.
As well as questioning parts of the McCanns’ evidence, it contained sensitive information about Madeleine’s sleeping patterns and raised the highly sensitive possibility that she could have died in an accident after leaving the apartment herself from one of two unsecured doors.
There was also an uncomfortable complication with Smith’s account. He had originally told the police that he had “recognised something” about the way Gerry McCann carried one of his children which reminded him of the man he had seen in Praia da Luz.
Smith has since stressed that he does not believe the man he saw was Gerry, and Scotland Yard do not consider this a possibility. Last week the McCanns were told officially by the Portuguese authorities that they are not suspects.
The McCanns were also understandably wary of Oakley after allegations that the chairman, Kevin Halligen, failed to pass on money paid by the fund to Exton’s team. Halligen denies this. He was later convicted of fraud in an unrelated case in the US.
The McCann fund source said the Oakley report was passed on to new private investigators after the contract ended, but that the firm’s work was considered “contaminated” by the financial dispute.
He said the fund wanted to continue to pursue information about the man seen by Tanner, and it would have been too expensive to investigate both sightings in full — so the Smith E-Fits were not publicised. It was also considered necessary to threaten legal action against the authors.
“[The report] was hypercritical of the people involved . . . It just wouldn’t be conducive to the investigation to have that report publicly declared because . . . the newspapers would have been all over it. And it would have been completely distracting,” said the source.
A statement released by the Find Madeleine fund said that “all information privately gathered during the search for Madeleine has been fully acted upon where necessary” and had been passed to Scotland Yard.
It continued: “Throughout the investigation, the Find Madeleine fund’s sole priority has been, and remains, to find Madeleine and bring her home as swiftly as possible.”
Insight: Heidi Blake and Jonathan Calvert
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id285.html
www.http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2794.msg95381#msg95381
-
Followed by this retraction...
http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/sunday-times-sued-mccanns-over-story-which-wrongly-claimed-evidence-was-withheld-police
Sunday Times sued by McCanns over story which wrongly claimed evidence was withheld from police
PressGazette
William Turvill
19 September 2014
(http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/sites/default/files/styles/node_image/public/McCanns.JPG)
The parents of missing child Madeleine McCann have sued The Sunday Times for libel over a story which they said gave the impression they had hindered the investigation into her disappearance.
According to publisher News UK the claim has been settled.
Kate and Gerry McCann took issue with a front-page story from last year, which the couple said suggested they had kept "secret from investigating authorities a crucial piece of evidence concerning the disappearance of their daughter".
In addition to the article, which was published on 27 October and remained online until 8 November, the McCanns also made reference to readers' comments left on the article - in High Court papers seen by Press Gazette.
The story, for which the paper apologised on 28 December, said: “The critical new evidence at the centre of Scotland Yard’s search for Madeleine McCann was kept secret for five years after it was presented to her parents by ex-MI5 investigators.”
The title reported that an intelligence report produced for the McCanns contained “crucial E-Fits” of a man who was identified as the prime suspect last year. The paper said that the “McCanns and their advisers sidelined the report and threatened to sue its authors if they divulged its contents”.
The Insight story also quoted a source close to the McCanns as saying that the report was “hyper-critical of the people involved”.
In their claim form, in which they were claiming unspecified damages, the McCanns said that the story was understood to mean that they had hindered "the search for [Madeleine] and the investigation into her disappearance by allowing the trail to go cold".
They said that the story led to them having “suffered serious damage to their reputations and severe embarrassment and distress”.
They also claimed that the paper's Insight team, which wrote the story, had not told their spokesman the full extent of the allegations which were to be made against them.
The McCanns also said that the story did not include several points made to Insight by their spokesman. They said this denied them "a proper opportunity to inform the readers of The Sunday Times of the falsity of the allegations against them".
On 1 November, the couple sent editor Martin Ivens an email headed: “Complaint letter – urgent”.
They said that the email, outlining what was wrong with the story with a “detailed rebuttal”, was responded to by executive editor Bob Tyrer six days later.
The McCanns said in their claim form that he told them “we could have made some facts clearer in the story” and that “we could have published more of your pre-publication statement” but largely rejected their complaint.
They said Tyrer offered them “three limited revisions” to the online article, publication of the statement from their spokesman and “an extremely limited” clarification in the corrections and clarifications column.
On 8 November Gerry McCann wrote back noting his disappointment that the article remained online and he pointed to the readers’ comments below.
The McCanns then consulted lawyers Carter Ruck, who wrote to The Sunday Times on 15 November “with proposed wording for an apology”.
The Sunday Times published the following apology on 28 December:
In articles dated October 27 ("Madeleine clues hidden for 5 years" and "Investigators had E-Fits five years ago", News) we referred to efits which were included in a report prepared by private investigators for the McCanns and the Fund in 2008. We accept that the articles may have been understood to suggest that the McCanns had withheld information from the authorities. This was not the case. We now understand and accept that the efits had been provided to the Portuguese and Leicestershire police by October 2009. We also understand that a copy of the final report including the efits was passed to the Metropolitan police in August 2011, shortly after it commenced its review. We apologise for the distress caused."
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=5267.msg187263#msg187263
-
October 2009 is right (for when the McCanns passed the e-fits to the Met.)
We know that at the end of January 2008, Martin Smith had been approached by Brian Kennedy to produce an e-fit, but refused.
It is common sense that all the time he thought the man he and his family saw was Gerry, he would refuse.
Why did he change his mind?
And who is supposed to have 'hidden' what for 5 years?
If, indeed, the Smiths saw Madeleine's abductor, that was not considered a strong enough lead to warrant continuation of the investigation?
The McCanns could not, in all conscience, publicise, quite possibly, an e-fit of Madeleine's abductor other than in the context of a live and on-going police enquiry.
-
October 2009 is right (for when the McCanns passed the e-fits to the Met.)
We know that at the end of January 2008, Martin Smith had been approached by Brian Kennedy to produce an e-fit, but refused.
It is common sense that all the time he thought the man he and his family saw was Gerry, he would refuse.
Why did he change his mind?
And who is supposed to have 'hidden' what for 5 years?
If, indeed, the Smiths saw Madeleine's abductor, that was not considered a strong enough lead to warrant continuation of the investigation?
The McCanns could not, in all conscience, publicise, quite possibly, an e-fit of Madeleine's abductor other than in the context of a live and on-going police enquiry.
The Times made a compete crock of the original story, if the e-fits were commissioned by latest early 2008 then they were held back from the police for nearly two years.
Bottom line is the McCanns promoted the wrong man as the abductor and so wasted years before Redwood came along and corrected them. That meant then that Redwood agreed with Amaral as far as the carriers were concerned. Both investigators are now retired!
-
The Times made a compete crock of the original story, if the e-fits were commissioned by latest early 2008 then they were held back from the police for nearly two years.
Nothing was 'held back'.
A live and on-going police enquiry (alone) was needed to publicise the e-fit of (possibly) Madeleine's abductor.
-
Statement made 12th September 2007
I am the above named person and I live at an address know to Police. In early May 2007 myself and my wife were on holiday in Portugal. I have already provided a witness statement in relation to the disappearance of Madeleine McCann. I would like to add the following;
The events of the past week or so, with the McCanns being very much in the news, have triggered my memory in relation to the incident.
In my original statement I described a distressed female who ran down a road towards a white van I had described.
Having viewed recent news footage of Mrs McCann I am now almost certain that she is the female I described as being in a distressed state. I say this because of her slight build, high cheekbones and her eyes and hairstyle.
I've agonised for days over whether or not to contact the police about this because it is a terrible thing to accuse somebody of. It had just not crossed my mind that the child?s parents could in some way be involved in her disappearance.
I have watched a good deal of news coverage about the McCanns over the past week or so. Another thing which has played on my mind is the coverage of Mr McCann walking off the aeroplane holding one of his young children. The way he was holding the child over his left shoulder reminded me of the man carrying the child from the white van in Portugal.
Although I could not describe the male I'd seen in Portugal because he had his back to me, it was the particular way Mr. McCann held the child that made me think. He held the child over his left shoulder with his left arm supporting the child?s weight.
Richard McMcCluskey
Is saying that after seeing the McCanns on the news on 9th Sept when they returned to UK he has not slept and is worried sick. He states he was watching the 10 PM on BBC and saw the McCanns getting off the plane and coming down the steps. He states it was like watching an action replay of the night he saw the male carrying the child back in Portugal. He states the way Gerry was carrying his twin triggered something in his head. It was exactly the same way and look of the male seen the night Maddie went missing . He also watched ITV news and Sky news and inferred it looked like the same person both times carrying the children.
Martin Smith
Mr McCluskey's recollection was entirely flawed ... as was Mr Smith's; which was precisely why the additional statement made by Mr McCluskey was disregarded by the Policia Judiciaria - it was also why the PJ disregarded Mr Smith's addition to his statement.
That Mr Smith's erroneous statement has been worked into the litany used to justify scepticism of the Drs McCann has been a bit of a mystery to me. Almost as big a mystery as the criticism directed at them for being able to use private investigators in the search for their daughter, particularly as the information uncovered in this way was sent to the Policia Judiciaria as the investigative authority.
-
Nothing was 'held back'.
A live and on-going police enquiry (alone) was needed to publicise the e-fit of (possibly) Madeleine's abductor.
Of course they were held back.
You can't rewrite history.
-
Of course they were held back.
You can't rewrite history.
I'm not trying to ....
-
And a further (and blindingly obvious) question: in October 2009, the police (English and Portuguese) were in possession of the efits.
Yet they chose to wait until the Crimewatch programme to release it publicly.
So why does anyone harangue the McCanns?
-
And a further (and blindingly obvious) question: in October 2009, the police (English and Portuguese) were in possession of the efits.
Yet they chose to wait until the Crimewatch programme to release it publicly.
So why does anyone harangue the McCanns?
May the 3 rd 2007. 8)-)))
-
May the 3 rd 2007. 8)-)))
... and that helps Madeleine McCann ... how ?????
-
... and that helps Madeleine McCann ... how ?????
nothing can help maddie now imo
-
Nothing was 'held back'.
A live and on-going police enquiry (alone) was needed to publicise the e-fit of (possibly) Madeleine's abductor.
You've lost me on this. Kate's book covers 8 suspicious sightings that need to be clarified, and whacks out e-fits for 7, but not for the Smithman one?
If she didn't have the right to publicise Smithman (and I can't see why not), how did she get the right to publicise the other e-fits?
Please enlighten me.
-
You've lost me on this. Kate's book covers 8 suspicious sightings that need to be clarified, and whacks out e-fits for 7, but not for the Smithman one?
If she didn't have the right to publicise Smithman (and I can't see why not), how did she get the right to publicise the other e-fits?
Please enlighten me.
I have tried.
I will try again.
Succinctly, the Smiths might have seen Madeleine's abductor. No other citing comes close to that.
It needed a police enquiry to release.
That is why the police themselves kept hold of it for a long while after being in possession of the efits until choosing the moment of the Crimewatch programme to release it.
The Crimewatch programme was in October 2013
The police had the efits in August 2011.
So, if you like, why did the police withhold the efits for over 2 years?
-
You've lost me on this. Kate's book covers 8 suspicious sightings that need to be clarified, and whacks out e-fits for 7, but not for the Smithman one?
If she didn't have the right to publicise Smithman (and I can't see why not), how did she get the right to publicise the other e-fits?
Please enlighten me.
She did mention the similarities between the two sightings.
What is not known is whether there was a legal reason why the Smith efits couldn't be published. There was a mention of an ongoing legal dispute with Oakley and co., and it's not clear exactly what that entailed.
-
No, not in my opinion but fact. We all know what happened to little Bushra whose parents were made to look like child traffickers. We know that Martin Smith was pressurised to tone down his identification of Gerry McCann. We know there were false sightings reported in order to justify the huge sums being paid to PI's.
All of it was one big fat lie. I won't even mention the conspiracy to destroy the lead detective Amaral which was funded by M3 and fronted by Marcos Correia. All of which was in turn paid for by Kennedy and the McCanns on the pretence they were searching for Madeleine. They must think were stupid or all least f...ing tossers to have swallowed such total crap.
Why has my response to this along with every single post I made since I got up this morning been removed?
Surely you are not still at your old game of removing my posts every time I beat you in discussion?
That's the way to win arguments Angelo; just blank out the oppositions responses especially if is sadies response. You will win everything then
-
I have tried.
I will try again.
Succinctly, the Smiths might have seen Madeleine's abductor. No other citing comes close to that.
It needed a police enquiry to release.
That is why the police themselves kept hold of it for a long while after being in possession of the efits until choosing the moment of the Crimewatch programme to release it.
The Crimewatch programme was in October 2013
The police had the efits in August 2011.
So, if you like, why did the police withhold the efits for over 2 years?
Thank you for taking the time to reply.
On this point, it looks like we are going to differ. The non-publication of the e-fit whilst describing the man in as much detail as possible seems like a missed opportunity.
The man might well have read Kate's book, come forward, cleared himself and that would have been a major step forward. Ditto, all the others were given the chance to come forward, even if none seems to have taken it, not even Crècheman.
Is it still the case these e-fits are still not in the Portuguese page of the Find Madeleine site?
Turning to your question re why the police did not publish them. If you mean the PJ, they are subject to the laws of Portugal, and there is no equivalent of Crimewatch here, or appeals by the PJ for information in such a manner.
If you mean OG, it is clear they went through a massive logistical exercise before getting to Crimewatch. I assume there was a lot of dancing around when OG raised the public appeal approach, given they depend on Portuguese co-operation.
I can't remember OG rushing anything out, though I wasn't interested in the case at the time.
Finally, although Crimewatch as a vehicle was clearly in place and could be used fairly quickly in UK cases, the filming for this one required a TV crew to operate in Luz. I'd bet there was more negotiation over that.
-
Thank you for taking the time to reply.
On this point, it looks like we are going to differ. The non-publication of the e-fit whilst describing the man in as much detail as possible seems like a missed opportunity.
The man might well have read Kate's book, come forward, cleared himself and that would have been a major step forward. Ditto, all the others were given the chance to come forward, even if none seems to have taken it, not even Crècheman.
Is it still the case these e-fits are still not in the Portuguese page of the Find Madeleine site?
Turning to your question re why the police did not publish them. If you mean the PJ, they are subject to the laws of Portugal, and there is no equivalent of Crimewatch here, or appeals by the PJ for information in such a manner.
If you mean OG, it is clear they went through a massive logistical exercise before getting to Crimewatch. I assume there was a lot of dancing around when OG raised the public appeal approach, given they depend on Portuguese co-operation.
I can't remember OG rushing anything out, though I wasn't interested in the case at the time.
Finally, although Crimewatch as a vehicle was clearly in place and could be used fairly quickly in UK cases, the filming for this one required a TV crew to operate in Luz. I'd bet there was more negotiation over that.
I found this when I was looking for something entirely different and thought it might lead to the explanation of why the Times paid up and apologised in recognition that they had wronged the McCanns.
It rather suggests to me that the images promoted in the Crimewatch appeal actually may have more to do with HOLMES than PIs.
New photo clue to Madeleine McCann case
DETECTIVES are using the latest computer technology to try to create a new image of a “prime suspect” who might have been involved in the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.
By JAMES MURRAY
PUBLISHED: 00:00, Sun, Mar 11, 2012
They are also working on a “computerised reconstruction” of the night she disappeared by putting thousands of pieces of information into the police Holmes computer.
The developments come at a significant time with the Policia Judiciaria in Portugal announcing it has a cold case team working on the investigation in Porto, north Portugal.
The Portuguese officers will work closely with the Scotland Yard detectives and will have “primacy” in the investigation.
The Sunday Express understands the Yard team have been examining all photofits, e-fits and drawings of people suspected of being involved in the disappearance of three-year-old Madeleine from an apartment in the Algarve resort of Praia da Luz on May 3, 2007. One of the best known drawings was based on a description given by a friend of Madeleine’s parents, Gerry and Kate. Jane Tanner claimed she saw a man carrying a child in his arms but did not get a good look at his face.
Other images were created from witnesses who saw people acting suspiciously in the vicinity around the time of the crime.
Irishman Martin Smith and members of his family saw a man carrying a child in his arms at about 10pm, about 45 minutes after the Tanner sighting. However, he was not asked to help produce a photofit. The Met refuses to discuss the details but it is expected that officers will approach Mr Smith and his family for help. Yard experts are looking at ways of improving the images to end with one pristine likeness of the “suspect”.
Officers are using the Home Office Large Major Enquiry System for computer logging of all relevant information and have tailored it to help create what is described as a “computer reconstruction” of the key events of the night of May 3.
It is hoped that eventually there will be an almost minute by minute account, which will assist officers.
The Yard launched its review last year after Kate and Gerry McCann appealed directly to David Cameron. Officers have visited Portugal several times and are said to have a good relationship with their Portuguese counterparts.
PJ deputy chief Pedro do Carmo said: ‘‘The Porto team is very experienced in these cases.”
Kate and Gerry, of Rothley, Leicestershire, hope the review will lead to a full scale reopening of the case.
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/307369/New-photo-clue-to-Madeleine-McCann-case
-
Jane didn't get a good look at George Harrison's face @)(++(*
What a farce when the McCanns are involved! The efits were from the hidden file.
-
I found this when I was looking for something entirely different and thought it might lead to the explanation of why the Times paid up and apologised in recognition that they had wronged the McCanns.
It rather suggests to me that the images promoted in the Crimewatch appeal actually may have more to do with HOLMES than PIs.
New photo clue to Madeleine McCann case
DETECTIVES are using the latest computer technology to try to create a new image of a “prime suspect” who might have been involved in the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.
By JAMES MURRAY
PUBLISHED: 00:00, Sun, Mar 11, 2012
They are also working on a “computerised reconstruction” of the night she disappeared by putting thousands of pieces of information into the police Holmes computer.
The developments come at a significant time with the Policia Judiciaria in Portugal announcing it has a cold case team working on the investigation in Porto, north Portugal.
The Portuguese officers will work closely with the Scotland Yard detectives and will have “primacy” in the investigation.
The Sunday Express understands the Yard team have been examining all photofits, e-fits and drawings of people suspected of being involved in the disappearance of three-year-old Madeleine from an apartment in the Algarve resort of Praia da Luz on May 3, 2007. One of the best known drawings was based on a description given by a friend of Madeleine’s parents, Gerry and Kate. Jane Tanner claimed she saw a man carrying a child in his arms but did not get a good look at his face.
Other images were created from witnesses who saw people acting suspiciously in the vicinity around the time of the crime.
Irishman Martin Smith and members of his family saw a man carrying a child in his arms at about 10pm, about 45 minutes after the Tanner sighting. However, he was not asked to help produce a photofit. The Met refuses to discuss the details but it is expected that officers will approach Mr Smith and his family for help. Yard experts are looking at ways of improving the images to end with one pristine likeness of the “suspect”.
Officers are using the Home Office Large Major Enquiry System for computer logging of all relevant information and have tailored it to help create what is described as a “computer reconstruction” of the key events of the night of May 3.
It is hoped that eventually there will be an almost minute by minute account, which will assist officers.
The Yard launched its review last year after Kate and Gerry McCann appealed directly to David Cameron. Officers have visited Portugal several times and are said to have a good relationship with their Portuguese counterparts.
PJ deputy chief Pedro do Carmo said: ‘‘The Porto team is very experienced in these cases.”
Kate and Gerry, of Rothley, Leicestershire, hope the review will lead to a full scale reopening of the case.
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/307369/New-photo-clue-to-Madeleine-McCann-case
How?. Do you mean they [the images]were created and then downloaded into HOLMES ?. If so who provided the data from which the images were created ?.
-
Nothing was 'held back'.
A live and on-going police enquiry (alone) was needed to publicise the e-fit of (possibly) Madeleine's abductor.
In a word, codwallop! There was no investigation when Edgar did this;
Former police chief Dave Edgar, leading the McCanns' investigation team, will unveil an e-fit image of the woman at a press conference in London and appeal for anyone who knows her to come forward.
Find Maddie Aussie The Sun
By ANTONELLA LAZZERI
Published: Today (05 August 2009)
-
How?. Do you mean they [the images]were created and then downloaded into HOLMES ?. If so who provided the data from which the images were created ?.
Perhaps you will note that it is not my byline on the article so the questions you ask might be better addressed to the author who no doubt will be able to clarify the situation regarding the efits and the early steps which led to the investigation into Madeleine McCann's disappearance being reopened.
The article seemed to be self explanatory to me ... then I'm grinding no axes other than to back up my opinions and what facts there may be with the provision of cites.
-
In a word, codwallop! There was no investigation when Edgar did this;
Former police chief Dave Edgar, leading the McCanns' investigation team, will unveil an e-fit image of the woman at a press conference in London and appeal for anyone who knows her to come forward.
Find Maddie Aussie The Sun
By ANTONELLA LAZZERI
Published: Today (05 August 2009)
I might be right.
Or I might be right.
But as far as I'm aware, Australia is nowhere near Praia da Luz ....
-
Perhaps you will note that it is not my byline on the article so the questions you ask might be better addressed to the author who no doubt will be able to clarify the situation regarding the efits and the early steps which led to the investigation into Madeleine McCann's disappearance being reopened.
The article seemed to be self explanatory to me ... then I'm grinding no axes other than to back up my opinions and what facts there may be with the provision of cites.
You voiced an opinion. I asked how you arrived at that from the information in the article.
HOLMES is a "management system". All management systems are big dumb fast things that know nothing til someone tells them something. So who told HOLMES the bit about the mystery efits? In your opinion.
-
Mrs Smith saw it sufficiently so that she asked him a question.
that statement doesn't make any sense....another odd post
-
You voiced an opinion. I asked how you arrived at that from the information in the article.
HOLMES is a "management system". All management systems are big dumb fast things that know nothing til someone tells them something. So who told HOLMES the bit about the mystery efits? In your opinion.
When the article was published, Sun, Mar 11, 2012 ... there were no mystery efits. Therefore to ask for or to pass comment on the blindingly obvious is superfluous. In my honest opinion, of course.
-
that statement doesn't make any sense....another odd post
We've all seen the newspaper report but it need to be backed up.
"Oh is she asleep?" Mary Smith to the man carrying the lookalike Madeleine child and got no response.
EXCLUSIVE: Tourist met rude man carrying child in blanket on night Madeleine vanished
By SANDRA MURPHY, VANESSA ALLEN
January 3, 2008
Speaking from his home in Drogheda, Co. Louth, Mr Smith recalled the sighting, which is strikingly similar to one by a friend of the McCanns, Jane Tanner. In hindsight, the retired Mr Smith said, the mans rude behaviour should have aroused his suspicions.
He explained: "The one thing we noted afterwards was that he gave us no greeting.
"My wife Mary remembered afterwards that she asked him, 'Oh, is she asleep?' But he never acknowledged her one way or another.
"He just put his head down and averted his eyes. This is very unusual in a tourist town at such a quiet time of the year."
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id162.html
-
I might be right.
Or I might be right.
But as far as I'm aware, Australia is nowhere near Praia da Luz ....
You said a live police investigation needed to be in place to publicise e-fits. Not so. Edgar managed to publicise the e-fit of the Australian woman when no investigation was taking place. He could have produced Smithman at a press conference also had he and the Mccanns wished to do so.
-
You said a live police investigation needed to be in place to publicise e-fits. Not so. Edgar managed to publicise the e-fit of the Australian woman when no investigation was taking place. He could have produced Smithman at a press conference also had he and the Mccanns wished to do so.
Proximity: (very) close to apartment 5a
Time: (just about) the time Madeleine is known to have been abducted!
Distinct from another continent (roughly) 12,000 miles (about 20,000 kilometres) away at a completely different time.
I'm sure you'll get there.
Eventually ....
-
I found this when I was looking for something entirely different and thought it might lead to the explanation of why the Times paid up and apologised in recognition that they had wronged the McCanns.
It rather suggests to me that the images promoted in the Crimewatch appeal actually may have more to do with HOLMES than PIs.
New photo clue to Madeleine McCann case
DETECTIVES are using the latest computer technology to try to create a new image of a “prime suspect” who might have been involved in the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.
By JAMES MURRAY
PUBLISHED: 00:00, Sun, Mar 11, 2012
They are also working on a “computerised reconstruction” of the night she disappeared by putting thousands of pieces of information into the police Holmes computer.
The developments come at a significant time with the Policia Judiciaria in Portugal announcing it has a cold case team working on the investigation in Porto, north Portugal.
The Portuguese officers will work closely with the Scotland Yard detectives and will have “primacy” in the investigation.
The Sunday Express understands the Yard team have been examining all photofits, e-fits and drawings of people suspected of being involved in the disappearance of three-year-old Madeleine from an apartment in the Algarve resort of Praia da Luz on May 3, 2007. One of the best known drawings was based on a description given by a friend of Madeleine’s parents, Gerry and Kate. Jane Tanner claimed she saw a man carrying a child in his arms but did not get a good look at his face.
Other images were created from witnesses who saw people acting suspiciously in the vicinity around the time of the crime.
Irishman Martin Smith and members of his family saw a man carrying a child in his arms at about 10pm, about 45 minutes after the Tanner sighting. However, he was not asked to help produce a photofit. The Met refuses to discuss the details but it is expected that officers will approach Mr Smith and his family for help. Yard experts are looking at ways of improving the images to end with one pristine likeness of the “suspect”.
Officers are using the Home Office Large Major Enquiry System for computer logging of all relevant information and have tailored it to help create what is described as a “computer reconstruction” of the key events of the night of May 3.
It is hoped that eventually there will be an almost minute by minute account, which will assist officers.
The Yard launched its review last year after Kate and Gerry McCann appealed directly to David Cameron. Officers have visited Portugal several times and are said to have a good relationship with their Portuguese counterparts.
PJ deputy chief Pedro do Carmo said: ‘‘The Porto team is very experienced in these cases.”
Kate and Gerry, of Rothley, Leicestershire, hope the review will lead to a full scale reopening of the case.
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/307369/New-photo-clue-to-Madeleine-McCann-case
HOLMES was being used to create a minute by minute account of the events of 3rd May.
The 'latest computer technology' (not HOLMES) was being used to create a new e-fit from all those previously produced, in an attempt to have one prime suspect.
So HOLMES produced Redwood's forensic timeline.
Other technology was used to amalgamate all the previous e-fits into one 'master' e-fit.
So was Smithman a mixture of all the previous e-fits or was he a mixture of all the reported sightings? SY said in an FOI that Irish witnesses produced him.
-
HOLMES was being used to create a minute by minute account of the events of 3rd May.
The 'latest computer technology' (not HOLMES) was being used to create a new e-fit from all those previously produced, in an attempt to have one prime suspect.
So HOLMES produced Redwood's forensic timeline.
Other technology was used to amalgamate all the previous e-fits into one 'master' e-fit.
So was Smithman a mixture of all the previous e-fits or was he a mixture of all the reported sightings? SY said in an FOI that Irish witnesses produced him.
Any computer system is dependent on the quality of the data.
Given the vagaries of the various statements, it would seem likely to be a case of garbage in, garbage out.
-
Proximity: (very) close to apartment 5a
Time: (just about) the time Madeleine is known to have been abducted!
Distinct from another continent (roughly) 12,000 miles (about 20,000 kilometres) away at a completely different time.
I'm sure you'll get there.
Eventually ....
That makes no sense to me, sorry. There's loads of e-fits around, most of which were publicised by the McCanns via the press. There was no reason not to include 'Smithman' in one of their press conferences.
-
That makes no sense to me, sorry. There's loads of e-fits around, most of which were publicised by the McCanns via the press. There was no reason not to include 'Smithman' in one of their press conferences.
The mechanisms of due process and accusing are quite different in England than Portugal.
That might be part of the problem.
To accuse (as, essentially, those e-fits do) you need the background and context of a police investigation to release them.
-
The mechanisms of due process and accusing are quite different in England than Portugal.
That might be part of the problem.
To accuse (as, essentially, those e-fits do) you need the background and context of a police investigation to release them.
So you are saying they couldn't release the e-fits because they looked like Gerry?
-
The mechanisms of due process and accusing are quite different in England than Portugal.
That might be part of the problem.
To accuse (as, essentially, those e-fits do) you need the background and context of a police investigation to release them.
So when Edgar released an e-fit of the Australian woman who is alleged to have asked someone if they had a child for her he wasn't accusing her of anything? What were the McCanns doing paying an artist to produce e-fits from Gail Cooper's descriptions and issuing them to the press? Both the PJ and LP were investigating at the time and both were by-passed. As 'call me Stu' told Paiva;
I was informed that it was probable that the photo fit made by Gail Cooper would reach the press during the weekend. I will inform you of the consequences of this next week in spite of the fact that we are not in any way involved in this.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/POWERPOINT.htm
-
So you are saying they couldn't release the e-fits because they looked like Gerry?
If one looks at one of those efits in particular it is a dead ringer for someone whose image has appeared in the Portuguese press of late in relation to other cases ... quite unmistakeably so.
Beauty may very well be in the eye of the beholder.
-
If one looks at one of those efits in particular it is a dead ringer for someone whose image has appeared in the Portuguese press of late in relation to other cases ... quite unmistakeably so.
Beauty may very well be in the eye of the beholder.
If, however, the e-fit is of the man seen by the Smiths, his height and build bear no relationship to the person I think you mean. You have to consider the whole person, not just the face.
-
If one looks at one of those efits in particular it is a dead ringer for someone whose image has appeared in the Portuguese press of late in relation to other cases ... quite unmistakeably so.
Beauty may very well be in the eye of the beholder.
I think that the one image is a dead ringer of Paulo Perriera Cristovao, but I doubt that it is him
-
I think that the one image is a dead ringer of Paulo Perriera Cristovao, but I doubt that it is him
I definitely do not think for a minute that it is him (and that is not a tongue in cheek assertion) but in my opinion had he sat for the artist there could not have been a closer resemblance.
-
I think that the one image is a dead ringer of Paulo Perriera Cristovao, but I doubt that it is him
It was a man who was there on the night and had no car but he was wearing a watch. The watch is very important to get his false alibi IMO.
-
It was a man who was there on the night and had no car but he was wearing a watch. The watch is very important to get his false alibi IMO.
He was wearing a watch, was he?
Gawd stone the crows! How strange *&*%£
-
He was wearing a watch, was he?
Gawd stone the crows! How strange *&*%£
and what of you mentioning the illuminati and Dan Brown in this case ?
-
Okay. Enough. Back On Topic.
-
So you are saying they couldn't release the e-fits because they looked like Gerry?
No.
I'm saying they couldn't release the e-fits because they needed a live and on-going police enquiry to do so.
-
Okay. Enough. Back On Topic.
Apologies.
Aside from the word 'admit' (why would anyone 'admit' to something there is no earthly reason to be ashamed of)?
Kate was right, and the title of the opening post reflects what Kate says.
Is there anything to debate?
-
I am still waiting for someone to point out to me the relevant article in the penal code that private attempts to provide the PJ with information that may assist the investigation are illegal, per se.
-
I am still waiting for someone to point out to me the relevant article in the penal code that private attempts to provide the PJ with information that may assist the investigation are illegal, per se.
Why?
Are you asking about a situation where I go to the PJ to volunteer information that has come to my attention and is relevant to the investigation? If I know a crime has been perpetrated, should I not report it?
The thread topic is conducting a private criminal investigation in Portugal, and the info in Kate's book that this is illegal.
If anyone can come up with a private investigation in Portugal known to the police, then the question would be answered.
Sifting through the entire penal code, translating it accurately, analysing the result, merely to work out if such an investigation is explicitly prohibited or instead effectively prohibited by a collection of combined articles sounds like an arduous task for very limited reward.
-
Why?
Are you asking about a situation where I go to the PJ to volunteer information that has come to my attention and is relevant to the investigation? If I know a crime has been perpetrated, should I not report it?
The thread topic is conducting a private criminal investigation in Portugal, and the info in Kate's book that this is illegal.
If anyone can come up with a private investigation in Portugal known to the police, then the question would be answered.
Sifting through the entire penal code, translating it accurately, analysing the result, merely to work out if such an investigation is explicitly prohibited or instead effectively prohibited by a collection of combined articles sounds like an arduous task for very limited reward.
then the question has not been answered and it is incorrect to make any claims one way or the other
-
Why?
Are you asking about a situation where I go to the PJ to volunteer information that has come to my attention and is relevant to the investigation? If I know a crime has been perpetrated, should I not report it?
The thread topic is conducting a private criminal investigation in Portugal, and the info in Kate's book that this is illegal.
If anyone can come up with a private investigation in Portugal known to the police, then the question would be answered.
Sifting through the entire penal code, translating it accurately, analysing the result, merely to work out if such an investigation is explicitly prohibited or instead effectively prohibited by a collection of combined articles sounds like an arduous task for very limited reward.
We may be at cross-purposes.
I can find nothing in the penal code that any information provided to the PJ with the intention of assisting the investigation, using legal means, would be illegal.
-
You obviously haven't read the files.
I'll warrant Martin Smith has.
The Times lost a libel action against the McCanns when its Insight team (so-called!) screwed up on this very point
Not that point.
http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/sunday-times-sued-mccanns-over-story-which-wrongly-claimed-evidence-was-withheld-police
-
Very much the point.
-
Not that point.
http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/sunday-times-sued-mccanns-over-story-which-wrongly-claimed-evidence-was-withheld-police
Yes, the Times couldn't prove that the McCanns had withheld information from the authorities, hence libel.
We accept that the articles may have been understood to suggest that the McCanns had withheld information from the authorities. This was not the case./quote]
-
It was conclusively proved that nothing was withheld from the police.
Never mind.
-
We may be at cross-purposes.
I can find nothing in the penal code that any information provided to the PJ with the intention of assisting the investigation, using legal means, would be illegal.
I cannot for a moment think why information obtained legally and passed to the PJ would somehow become illegal.
The e-fits produced by the PIs were done legally, (I think but have not checked), in a country outside of Portugal, in a manner which would be (I believe) illegal in Portugal.
Would this render the information illegal in Portugal? I don't know.
Would this mean the PJ could not use this information? I don't know.
Would this mean the evidence would not be permissible in a prosecution? I don't know.
Answering these 3 questions would require digging through vast tracts of the penal code. Personally, I am not interested enough in this point to invest the time and effort required to reach an informed viewpoint.
If we return to Mrs Murat, if she was investigating, I would think her information would be deemed illegal.
If she was not and her effort was legal, I can see no reason why the PJ could not include her information as intelligence.
If her sources were not named, I doubt the information could be used further. I don't see anonymous information being used beyond that e.g. to get a court enter to search premises without the owner's permission, or to feature in any way in a prosecution.
Information thought to have originated from the work of private investigators working within Portugal is a curate's egg. The likelihood is that such information was obtained in an illegal way. It would not become legal merely because someone said 'trust me, this was obtained legally', It would require convincing proof that it had been obtained legally. All IMO as I am not an expert in this area.
I will stick with Kate's view, that effectively private investigation into a criminal act within Portugal would be illegal. Further that this has nothing to do with whether there is an investigation by Portuguese authorities that is active or not.
The McCanns seem to have considered this situation. To do the best they could in the situation, they chose private investigators based outside of Portugal. It would appear from the Times article that this information was passed to the Portuguese authorities. I am not clear as to whether the Portuguese team was active at that time. I can't see the relevance, unless the e-fits were, possibly with other information, deemed to be new evidence, in the hopes of getting a fresh Portuguese investigation.
Assuming that was the intent, should the PJ have started a fresh investigation? If the only information passed was the e-fits, the answer is a resounding no. What were they supposed to believe? Statements made on 26 May 2007 that the 3 people would not be able to recognise the man again and provided little information re his face. Or e-fits made many months after the event, which purport to be the same man but which look markedly different?
What was the PJ supposed to do with the e-fits? Basically, they don't do appeals to the public. So within Portugal, those e-fits had VERY limited value.
The Crimewatch 2013 programme WAS reported, as a news item, in Portuguese media. Everything I've seen in Portuguese media makes Smithman a SUSPECT. That is NOT the position put forward by OG in Crimewatch 2013, but it is common parlance in the media within Portugal.
Even if Smithman recognises himself, if he is Portuguese he has a disincentive to clear things up.
We appear to be going all round the houses on this one. If OG shelves and the McCanns start another PI team, I have no doubt whatsoever that the team will be based outside of Portugal. What they can do on the ground in Portugal in terms of investigating is very little, assuming they wish to remain legal. But there is more than one way to skin a cat.