UK Justice Forum
Disappeared and Abducted Children and Young Adults => Madeleine McCann (3) disappeared from her parent's holiday apartment at Ocean Club, Praia da Luz, Portugal on 3 May 2007. No trace of her has ever been found. => Topic started by: faithlilly on January 20, 2015, 10:47:51 AM
-
The main damage done re this book is that people reading it were deliberately led to believe by the author that it was a first hand account written by the Lead Investigator who had had personal contact with the McCanns. This would definitely influence people to believe the contents IMO.
Nothing could be further from the truth and I hope the fact that Amaral had never met or spoken to KM and only briefly met GM was made crystal clear to the judge.
Did Amaral explicitly state he had met Kate ?
38
-
Did Amaral explicitly state he had met Kate ?
Yes!
There was a moment in a meeting ...
Amaral goes on, in detail, to describe Kate's emotion, as if an eye-witness ...
-
Yes!
There was a moment in a meeting ...
Amaral goes on, in detail, to describe Kate's emotion, as if an eye-witness ...
But did he explicitly say he had met Kate ?
-
But did he explicitly say he had met Kate ?
Yes
-
Yes
Then you will be able to quote the passage.
-
Then you will be able to quote the passage.
Goncalo Amaral in his interview to El Mundo
Q – It was said that Kate was very cold. But I've seen her cry.
A - So did I. She is not cold. There was a moment, in a meeting with them, when we set out the sofa theory [that Madeleine fell off it and died]. Kate puts her head down, looking distant, and, after a few seconds, she looked up again as if nothing had happened. She looked like she was escaping from the role that she was interpreting.
Q - When you raised the hypothesis that the girl might have died after falling off the sofa, did Kate McCann answer?
A - She did not answer, she just dropped her head for a moment, as if she was about to faint. She had an emotional collapse that lasted just a moment.
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id165.html
-
Goncalo Amaral in his interview to El Mundo
Q – It was said that Kate was very cold. But I've seen her cry.
A - So did I. She is not cold. There was a moment, in a meeting with them, when we set out the sofa theory [that Madeleine fell off it and died]. Kate puts her head down, looking distant, and, after a few seconds, she looked up again as if nothing had happened. She looked like she was escaping from the role that she was interpreting.
Q - When you raised the hypothesis that the girl might have died after falling off the sofa, did Kate McCann answer?
A - She did not answer, she just dropped her head for a moment, as if she was about to faint. She had an emotional collapse that lasted just a moment.
So they don't have two-way mirrors in police stations in Portugal ?
So I'll ask again. Where does he explicitly state IN THE BOOK that he met Kate ?
-
So they don't have two-way mirrors in police stations in Portugal ?
So I'll ask again. Where does he explicitly state IN THE BOOK that he met Kate ?
Good to see you conceding defeat with your customary good grace, Faith ...
-
Good to see you conceding defeat with your customary good grace, Faith ...
No need to concede defeat when the opposition has failed to make their case. Now I'll ask again.
Where IN THE BOOK ( because that is what the litigation is about ) does it say Amaral met Kate ? It's a simple enough question yet one it seems you are avoiding.
-
No need to concede defeat when the opposition has failed to make their case. Now I'll ask again.
Where IN THE BOOK ( because that is what the litigation is about ) does it say Amaral met Kate ? It's a simple enough question yet one it seems you are avoiding.
What the above illustrates is what we've known all along, that Amaral is a lying toe-rag, because by Portuguese law you cannot ask incriminating questions of informal witnesses, and it doesn't get much more incriminating than that Madeleine fell off the sofa and died, and what happened next ...
There is no record of any such question being asked during the arguido interviews which is the only legal context (by Portuguese law) where it could be asked.
-
What the above illustrates is what we've known all along, that Amaral is a lying toe-rag, because by Portuguese law you cannot ask incriminating questions of informal witnesses, and it doesn't get much more incriminating than that Madeleine fell off the sofa and died, and what happened next ...
There is no record of any such question being asked during the arguido interviews which is the only legal context (by Portuguese law) where it could be asked.
'Amaral is a lying toe-rag'
Now that is reminiscent of the hate towards Amaral by both the mccanns and their supportive 'crew', which you certainly are.
Go to Portugal and say that.
Also, repeat your allegations as regards Martin Grime, to his face.
-
What the above illustrates is what we've known all along, that Amaral is a lying toe-rag, because by Portuguese law you cannot ask incriminating questions of informal witnesses, and it doesn't get much more incriminating than that Madeleine fell off the sofa and died, and what happened next ...
There is no record of any such question being asked during the arguido interviews which is the only legal context (by Portuguese law) where it could be asked.
im not concerned with what the passage illustrates and I'm sure the judge won't be either.
Now I will ask again. Where IN THE BOOK does it explicitly say Amaral met Kate ?
-
So they don't have two-way mirrors in police stations in Portugal ?
So I'll ask again. Where does he explicitly state IN THE BOOK that he met Kate ?
What would the average person assume that "we" means?
ETA: Offhand, I don't recall him stating it in the book itself, but what's not clear is whether the interviews are part of the litigation or not.
-
What would the average person assume that "we" means?
ETA: Offhand, I don't recall him stating it in the book itself, but what's not clear is whether the interviews are part of the litigation or not.
Looks like a possibility. otherwise why would the question arise........
Judge - Do you know about interviews of Gonçalo Amaral in the Correio da Manhã?
GMC - says that he read many interviews.
Judge - What about interviews upon the thesis of the book?
GMC - argues that there were many articles on the theme published in the Correio da Manhã and also in other newspapers.
Judge - Do you remember an article published in July 2008 in the Correio da Manhã?
GMC - remarks that articles were published almost on a daily basis and asks whether he can see the headline.
- The Judge asks the clerk to show the article to Gerry McCann, says that the header is "Madeleine died in the flat", and asks the interpreter to translate the beginning of the article.
Judge - Do you remember it?
GMC - says that he saw that in many other newspapers.
- The Judge observes that this was the first of a series of excerpts of "A Verdade da Mentira" published by the Correio da Manhã.
-
No need to concede defeat when the opposition has failed to make their case. Now I'll ask again.
Where IN THE BOOK ( because that is what the litigation is about ) does it say Amaral met Kate ? It's a simple enough question yet one it seems you are avoiding.
Shifting your goalposts, Faith.
Earlier you asked:
Did Amaral explicitly state he had met Kate ?
Answer (to your earlier question!)
Yes!
-
Shifting your goalposts, Faith.
Earlier you asked:
Did Amaral explicitly state he had met Kate ?
Answer (to your earlier question!)
Yes!
Okay, let's have it your way.
This is what you posted :
Q – It was said that Kate was very cold. But I've seen her cry.
A - So did I. She is not cold. There was a moment, in a meeting with them, when we set out the sofa theory [that Madeleine fell off it and died]. Kate puts her head down, looking distant, and, after a few seconds, she looked up again as if nothing had happened. She looked like she was escaping from the role that she was interpreting.
Q - When you raised the hypothesis that the girl might have died after falling off the sofa, did Kate McCann answer?
A - She did not answer, she just dropped her head for a moment, as if she was about to faint. She had an emotional collapse that lasted just a moment.
Nowhere does he explicitly say he met Kate and didn't just get his information either by watching through a two-way mirror or from a report by one of his officers.
-
Okay, let's have it your way.
This is what you posted :
Q – It was said that Kate was very cold. But I've seen her cry.
A - So did I. She is not cold. There was a moment, in a meeting with them, when we set out the sofa theory [that Madeleine fell off it and died]. Kate puts her head down, looking distant, and, after a few seconds, she looked up again as if nothing had happened. She looked like she was escaping from the role that she was interpreting.
Q - When you raised the hypothesis that the girl might have died after falling off the sofa, did Kate McCann answer?
A - She did not answer, she just dropped her head for a moment, as if she was about to faint. She had an emotional collapse that lasted just a moment.
Nowhere does he explicitly say he met Kate and didn't just get his information either by watching through a two-way mirror or from a report by one of his officers.
IMO his determination to keep the fact that he had never met the McCanns etc from the public was carried on in his various interviews. He could have admitted it in the following - but prefers to skate round it and to continue to perpetuate the lie IMO.
Quote
The former PJ coordinator who directed the Maddie case, Gonçalo Amaral, is more accessible. He received 'tvmais' in his home in Portimão and he agreed to read the interview that the McCanns gave to 'Expresso' with us. He agreed to reply to the same questions, but he gave very different answers. "It is false, wrong, most of the replies are not true", was what we heard him say most often.
Concerning his relationship with the couple, he says they knew each other well. "They knew who I was and they knew what my functions were."
End quote
-
IMO his determination to keep the fact that he had never met the McCanns etc from the public was carried on in his various interviews. He could have admitted it in the following - but prefers to skate round it and to continue to perpetuate the lie IMO.
Quote
The former PJ coordinator who directed the Maddie case, Gonçalo Amaral, is more accessible. He received 'tvmais' in his home in Portimão and he agreed to read the interview that the McCanns gave to 'Expresso' with us. He agreed to reply to the same questions, but he gave very different answers. "It is false, wrong, most of the replies are not true", was what we heard him say most often.
Concerning his relationship with the couple, he says they knew each other well. "They knew who I was and they knew what my functions were."
End quote
In the previous quote you posted he said "There was a moment, in a meeting with them, when we set out the sofa theory [that Madeleine fell off it and died]. Kate puts her head down, looking distant..." - the clear inference is that this was a face to face encounter (the clues are in the words "in a meeting with them when we") - not a meeting via a two-way mirror, which I'm sure most people would agree is an odd way to conduct a meeting!
-
What would the average person assume that "we" means?
ETA: Offhand, I don't recall him stating it in the book itself, but what's not clear is whether the interviews are part of the litigation or not.
Exactly - and here is another example of the use of the word 'we' to dupe his readers into thinking he was there.
FIRST EYE WITNESS STATEMENTS; KATE HEALY'S SURPRISING REACTION
Madeleine's parents are already back in Vila da Luz when we receive photos taken on an area of the motorway: you can make out the figure of a little girl, who looks like Madeleine, accompanied by a couple. These images come from a CCTV camera on the motorway linking Lagos to the Spanish border. The McCanns are asked to come to Portimao in order to proceed to an identification. It's the end of the day. Kate Healy seems annoyed at coming back and made uncomfortable by the speed of the police car taking her. We are somewhat astonished by her reaction, as if she was not expecting to get her daughter back. The identification turns out negative.
End quote.
Incidentally Kate (who WAS there) gives a completely different description of that event ending with:
Quote
....Back at the police station we endured at at least another ten minutes of torture in the waiting area before somebody showed us a photograph, clearly taken from CCTV, of a blonde child with a woman in a petrol station shop. We weren't told anything about this, just asked whether the little girl was Madeleine. She wasn't. And that was that. Again we were sent on our way, utterly devastated.
End quote
-
IMO his determination to keep the fact that he had never met the McCanns etc from the public was carried on in his various interviews. He could have admitted it in the following - but prefers to skate round it and to continue to perpetuate the lie IMO.
Quote
The former PJ coordinator who directed the Maddie case, Gonçalo Amaral, is more accessible. He received 'tvmais' in his home in Portimão and he agreed to read the interview that the McCanns gave to 'Expresso' with us. He agreed to reply to the same questions, but he gave very different answers. "It is false, wrong, most of the replies are not true", was what we heard him say most often.
Concerning his relationship with the couple, he says they knew each other well. "They knew who I was and they knew what my functions were."
End quote
Nope that doesn't do it either.
BTW I believe Rebelo didn't meet them either, even though he visited the UK. Must be a coordinator thing.
-
If I informed you that I knew the McCanns very well you would immediately assume that I had first-hand knowledge of them, not that I knew them from media reports and the TV.
-
Nope that doesn't do it either.
BTW I believe Rebelo didn't meet them either, even though he visited the UK. Must be a coordinator thing.
That doesn't prove that he wouldn't have made it his business to meet them - had he been Lead investigator from the start. I believe the Oporto team have met them.
If you still think that Amaral did not deliberately set out to convince his readers that he had personal contact with the McCanns during his time in office - and carry on that lie in subsequent interviews - then I am surprised Faith - as IMO no reasonable person could come to that conclusion on the strength of the evidence.
IMO he should have made it clear in his introduction that his book was NOT a first hand account because he personally had never had any personal contact/interviews etc. with them. But then I suppose second/third hand accounts are not as 'saleable' as a book - the contents of which - readers are led to believe by the author - came straight from the horses mouth.
-
Exactly - and here is another example of the use of the word 'we' to dupe his readers into thinking he was there.
FIRST EYE WITNESS STATEMENTS; KATE HEALY'S SURPRISING REACTION
Madeleine's parents are already back in Vila da Luz when we receive photos taken on an area of the motorway: you can make out the figure of a little girl, who looks like Madeleine, accompanied by a couple. These images come from a CCTV camera on the motorway linking Lagos to the Spanish border. The McCanns are asked to come to Portimao in order to proceed to an identification. It's the end of the day. Kate Healy seems annoyed at coming back and made uncomfortable by the speed of the police car taking her. We are somewhat astonished by her reaction, as if she was not expecting to get her daughter back. The identification turns out negative.
End quote.
Incidentally Kate (who WAS there) gives a completely different description of that event ending with:
Quote
....Back at the police station we endured at at least another ten minutes of torture in the waiting area before somebody showed us a photograph, clearly taken from CCTV, of a blonde child with a woman in a petrol station shop. We weren't told anything about this, just asked whether the little girl was Madeleine. She wasn't. And that was that. Again we were sent on our way, utterly devastated.
End quote
You don't quite get the concept of we meaning the PJ.
-
You don't quite get the concept of we meaning the PJ.
The use of the word 'we' in that context clearly implies to the reader that Amaral was there and was also personally 'astonished' by what he was witnessing first hand. Why didn't he say 'My officers told me they were astonished'?
-
Exactly - and here is another example of the use of the word 'we' to dupe his readers into thinking he was there.
FIRST EYE WITNESS STATEMENTS; KATE HEALY'S SURPRISING REACTION
Madeleine's parents are already back in Vila da Luz when we receive photos taken on an area of the motorway: you can make out the figure of a little girl, who looks like Madeleine, accompanied by a couple. These images come from a CCTV camera on the motorway linking Lagos to the Spanish border. The McCanns are asked to come to Portimao in order to proceed to an identification. It's the end of the day. Kate Healy seems annoyed at coming back and made uncomfortable by the speed of the police car taking her. We are somewhat astonished by her reaction, as if she was not expecting to get her daughter back. The identification turns out negative.
End quote.
Incidentally Kate (who WAS there) gives a completely different description of that event ending with:
Quote
....Back at the police station we endured at at least another ten minutes of torture in the waiting area before somebody showed us a photograph, clearly taken from CCTV, of a blonde child with a woman in a petrol station shop. We weren't told anything about this, just asked whether the little girl was Madeleine. She wasn't. And that was that. Again we were sent on our way, utterly devastated.
End quote
Amaral says 'Kate seems annoyed' at going back the station. All the way through the book Amaral tries to make out that the McCann's are uncaring parents and that they didn't expect to get their daughter back [In other words they knew what had happened to her]
Kate says this about the ride back to the station on that day [Amaral was not there by the way]
'The Police officer had a call from his station, he said something to Angela, who explained that he'd been ordered to return us to the police station straight away. He wasn't allowed to tell us why'.end quote.
Can you imagine that? A sudden call for them to return to the police station and not knowing why.
Quote -
He suddenly swung the car into a U-turn, floored the acceletrator and drove us at a life threatening 120 MPH plus back towards Portimao. Had Madeleine been found? Please God. Was she alive? Was she dead? Gerry and I clung on to each other for dear life. I was crying hysterically and praying for all I was worth. Unquote
Amaral in his book says Kate was annoyed !! FGS.
-
That doesn't prove that he wouldn't have made it his business to meet them - had he been Lead investigator from the start. I believe the Oporto team have met them.
If you still think that Amaral did not deliberately set out to convince his readers that he had personal contact with the McCanns during his time in office - and carry on that lie in subsequent interviews - then I am surprised Faith - as IMO no reasonable person could come to that conclusion on the strength of the evidence.
IMO he should have made it clear in his introduction that his book was NOT a first hand account because he personally had never had any personal contact/interviews etc. with them. But then I suppose second/third hand accounts are not as 'saleable' as a book - the contents of which - readers are led to believe by the author - came straight from the horses mouth.
Fact is Rebelo was coordinator for longer than Amaral and didn't feel he needed to meet the McCanns to coordinate the investigation and we have no idea whether the coordinator of the Oporto team has deemed it necessary to meet the McCanns either.
-
Fact is Rebelo was coordinator for longer than Amaral and didn't feel he needed to meet the McCanns to coordinate the investigation and we have no idea whether the coordinator of the Oporto team has deemed it necessary to meet the McCanns either.
Fact is the McCanns weren't in Portugal when Rebelo was coordinator. Amaral had 6 months to meet them.
-
Fact is the McCanns weren't in Portugal when Rebelo was coordinator. Amaral had 6 months to meet them.
Rebelo was in the UK for several days during the rogatory interviews. If he had deemed it necessary to meet them he could have quite easily have done so then.
-
Rebelo was in the UK for several days during the rogatory interviews. If he had deemed it necessary to meet them he could have quite easily have done so then.
No, not several days he had to return to Portugal early, because of Amaral spouting his mouth off.
-
No, not several days he had to return to Portugal early, because of Amaral spouting his mouth off.
He was still here long enough to organise a meeting with the McCanns.
-
He was still here long enough to organise a meeting with the McCanns.
X
-
He was still here long enough to organise a meeting with the McCanns.
Why would Rebelo want to arrange a meeting with The McCanns? They were Arguidos, and not obliged to answer any dubious questions. So it would have been a pointless exercise.
-
Why would Rebelo want to arrange a meeting with The McCanns? They were Arguidos, and not obliged to answer any dubious questions. So it would have been a pointless exercise.
I assume for the same reason that some believe Amaral should have, to 'get their measure'.
I mean how can you know how lovely the McCann couple are and how incapable they were of committing any crime if you haven't met them !!!
-
I assume for the same reason that some believe Amaral should have, to 'get their measure'.
I mean how can you know how lovely the McCann couple are and how incapable they were of committing any crime if you haven't met them !!!
Rebelo did say that making them Arguidos was hasty, so perhaps he didn't want to apologise.
-
Why would Rebelo want to arrange a meeting with The McCanns? They were Arguidos, and not obliged to answer any dubious questions. So it would have been a pointless exercise.
I think probably of more importance than reinterviewing three arguidos who could safely be consigned to the back burner until he was up to speed with the case and who could be spoken to at any time of his choosing ... might have been a 'handover' from his predecessor.
Is there a record of such a meeting?
-
I think probably of more importance than reinterviewing three arguidos who could safely be consigned to the back burner until he was up to speed with the case and who could be spoken to at any time of his choosing ... might have been a 'handover' from his predecessor.
Is there a record of such a meeting?
I know there was one report from the bad ol' British press (Daily Mail, if memory serves right) that Rebelo was incandescent with rage at the pot mess he inherited from his predecessor in that position.
-
Rebelo did say that making them Arguidos was hasty, so perhaps he didn't want to apologise.
No he didn't. That was Ribeiro.
-
The use of the word 'we' in that context clearly implies to the reader that Amaral was there and was also personally 'astonished' by what he was witnessing first hand. Why didn't he say 'My officers told me they were astonished'?
It just as easily means the PJ. If Redwood said we you would assume he was talking about SY.
-
Apologies for introducing so many new threads at once, can't be helped unfortunately.
-
He was still here long enough to organise a meeting with the McCanns.
I thought that the McCanns were out of the country when he was here. Am I mistaken?
-
What reason could Kate have, for saying she did not meet Amaral, if she did?
And if Amaral says that he did meet her, why does he not tell us where, exactly this meeting took place and who else was present? Is it in his book?
-
What reason could Kate have, for saying she did not meet Amaral, if she did?
And if Amaral says that he did meet her, why does he not tell us where, exactly this meeting took place and who else was present? Is it in his book?
Maybe he means observing them?
It's not in his book. To be honest he - and everyone else - is remarkably reticent about what went on inside that police station in those two days in September. Which is precisely in 2008 what I hoped he would write about 8(8-))
-
Maybe he means observing them?
I think that must be it, Lyall. So a translation fault then? Because you can't meet someone through a window or mirror.
-
I think that must be it, Lyall. So a translation fault then? Because you can't meet someone through a window or mirror.
It's a small town so at some point in May 2007 they perhaps were more or less in the same place at the same time? Maybe he means something like that.
Though I guess he spent most of his time in Portimao.
-
It's a small town so at some point in May 2007 they perhaps were more or less in the same place at the same time? Maybe he means something like that.
Though I guess he spent most of his time in Portimao.
Well whatever he means, it wasn't meeting them. We all know, what meeting someone means and it isn't passing them in the street, seeing them through a window, or viewing them from afar. Very odd thing for him to say. IMO
-
Well whatever he means, it wasn't meeting them. We all now, what meeting someone means and it isn't passing them in the street, seeing them through a window, or viewing them from afar. Very odd thing for him to say. IMO
He's said odder @)(++(*
-
He's said odder @)(++(*
How very true, In fact we wonder, what odd remark will be heard of next @)(++(* What was I thinking of.
-
Whatever anyone thinks his true motive for writing the book was, he was the only one who put his neck on the line in 2008 for what many others than just him believed in. And it's been a very long struggle.
It's just like the end of Gladiator (... a bit) 8)-)))
"A striking story. Now the people want to know how the story ends."
-
Whatever anyone thinks his true motive for writing the book was, he was the only one who put his neck on the line in 2008 for what many others than just him believed in. And it's been a very long struggle.
It's just like the end of Gladiator (... a bit) 8)-)))
"A striking story. Now the people want to know how the story ends."
you have your opinion..I have mine...first amaral is a disgraced cop...proved in the Portuguese courts...second he wrote the book to make himself some money ...IMO...hopefully soon he will have a large proportion confiscated by the courts....an absolutely vile person IMO
-
you have your opinion..I have mine...first amaral is a disgraced cop...proved in the Portuguese courts...second he wrote the book to make himself some money ...IMO...hopefully soon he will have a large proportion confiscated by the courts....an absolutely vile person IMO
You'll admit to being biased. Me too. But truthfully there are no innocents in this story, apart from the children. GA's character doesn't really matter, the fact is he isn't alone in that courtroom and the other defendants still being there after all this time I think means more than you'll admit.
-
You'll admit to being biased. Me too. But truthfully there are no innocents in this story, apart from the children. GA's character doesn't really matter, the fact is he isn't alone in that courtroom and the other defendants still being there after all this time I think means more than you'll admit.
It would have been so easy to write a book which did what it claimed on the cover and that was to tell the truth and do it without libelling anyone, however wrong thread for that one.
Let me see now, why should anyone place any reliance on statements being made by a man with a criminal conviction for telling lies? While disbelieving everyone else who contradicts or deviates from his script.
I am sure that had Mr Amaral and the Drs McCann ever had a face to face meeting as he constantly implies ... someone would be able to confirm that ... similarly the fact that there is no corroboration confirms Dr Kate McCann's assertion.
What is so difficult to understand about that?
-
11-09-2008
Thanks to 'Ines' for translation
Q: What relationship do you have with the McCann couple?
I was the head of the department investigating the case within the PJ in Portimao. I was responsible for organising the work of the investigation and ensuring myself of following the direction of the investigation, and therefore I was with the couple once or twice as well as with all the witnesses and with inspectors working on the case. (...)
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id165.html
-
You'll admit to being biased. Me too. But truthfully there are no innocents in this story, apart from the children. GA's character doesn't really matter, the fact is he isn't alone in that courtroom and the other defendants still being there after all this time I think means more than you'll admit.
I don't admit to being biased..but it seems you do. My opinion of the McCanns is based on looking at and assessing evidence from both sides...having done this I don't believe they have committed any criminal acts
-
11-09-2008
Thanks to 'Ines' for translation
Q: What relationship do you have with the McCann couple?
I was the head of the department investigating the case within the PJ in Portimao. I was responsible for organising the work of the investigation and ensuring myself of following the direction of the investigation, and therefore I was with the couple once or twice as well as with all the witnesses and with inspectors working on the case. (...)
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id165.html
Thanks Carana
But was the "meeting " thru one way glass ? .... cos Kate wasn't aware of it.
Only speculating.
-
11-09-2008
Thanks to 'Ines' for translation
Q: What relationship do you have with the McCann couple?
I was the head of the department investigating the case within the PJ in Portimao. I was responsible for organising the work of the investigation and ensuring myself of following the direction of the investigation, and therefore I was with the couple once or twice as well as with all the witnesses and with inspectors working on the case. (...)
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id165.html
From memory so apols if I'm wrong - but - I have not seen a statement which shows who the interviewing officer(s) were. I presume on the original statements - the names of all those present would have been recorded. So if he had been present - he would have no difficulty in providing the evidence. So why hasn't he pointed that out?
IMO he deliberately set out to give the impression that he had personal contact with the McCanns throughout his time in office - because a first hand account of the case would be so much more convincing than a book based in it's entirely on second/third hand information - obtained by interpreting other people's reports, opinions and comments and putting his own spin on them. Not the same thing at all is it.
I will always maintain that to deceive his readers in that way was thorougly dishonest.
-
No I'm not.
In case you hadn't noted, davel has claimed to be 'not biased', and that is pure bull.
IMO you do back Amaral 100%. You don't accept the explanations given to you as to why people support the McCanns so why should I accept your denial re Amaral?
Maybe if you stopped posting your assumptions of why people think differently to you - ad nauseam - then there would be no need for anyone to post their similar assumptions about yourself.
IMO for both 'sides' to continue in that vein adds nothing to the debate.
Agreed?
-
IMO you do back Amaral 100%. You don't accept the explanations given to you as to why people support the McCanns so why should I accept your denial re Amaral?
Maybe if you stopped posting your assumptions of why people think differently to you - ad nauseam - then there would be no need for anyone to post their similar assumptions about yourself.
IMO for both 'sides' to continue in that vein adds nothing to the debate.
Agreed?
I really don't give a monkeys as regards whether you believe I support Amaral 100% or not.
However, i'm proud to say i make no attempt to attach myself to the mccanns as some here do, metaphorically or physically. 8)--))
-
Thanks Carana
But was the "meeting " thru one way glass ? .... cos Kate wasn't aware of it.
Only speculating.
Hard to tell, Sadie... I don't see how he would have had time to sit in on interviews with all the witnesses, for example.
-
I really don't give a monkeys as regards whether you believe I support Amaral 100% or not.
However, i'm proud to say i make no attempt to attach myself to the mccanns as some here do, metaphorically or physically. 8)--))
Well there you go then. If you assume from their posts that people on here are 'attached' to the McCanns - then you can have no objection when I assume from your posts that you are similarly 'attached' to Amaral, and worship the ground he walks on.
Your turn.
Daft innit?
-
I really don't give a monkeys as regards whether you believe I support Amaral 100% or not.
However, i'm proud to say i make no attempt to attach myself to the mccanns as some here do, metaphorically or physically. 8)--))
and no one gives a monkeys to what you think and the rubbish you post..simple
-
and no one gives a monkeys to what you think and the rubbish you post..simple
Oh dear Dave.
Your rattled again.
If you don't give a monkey's as to what I post, don't answer.
You can of course come and debate on amazon, where the mods are neutral.
-
Oh dear Dave.
Your rattled again.
If you don't give a monkey's as to what I post, don't answer.
You can of course cone and debate on amazon, where the mods are neutral.
I think you mean you're not your....I have no wish to debate I just prefer to post my views...debate on this or any other forum is pointless
-
Oh dear Dave.
Your rattled again.
If you don't give a monkey's as to what I post, don't answer.
You can of course cone and debate on amazon, where the mods are neutral.
You appear to be obsessed with Davel. Nothing to stop posters from other forums posting here to fight your battles for you if that's what you want - so why don't you ask them to do that?
-
You appear to be obsessed with Davel. Nothing to stop posters from other forums posting here to fight your battles for you if that's what you want - so why don't you ask them to do that?
You and davel are welcome to post on amazon, where the mods are neutral.
Something tells me you won't. 8)-)))
-
You and davel are welcome to post on amazon, where the mods are neutral.
Something tells me you won't. 8)-)))
as I question why I bother to post on here.. I certainly don't want to involve myself in pointless arguments with idiots...I've had enough of that already
-
as I question why I bother to post on here.. I certainly don't want to involve myself in pointless arguments with idiots...I've had enough of that already
Obviously you're not capable of posting, where you have no backup.
-
You and davel are welcome to post on amazon, where the mods are neutral.
Something tells me you won't. 8)-)))
I'm quite happy posting here thank you - and have no complaints about the mods. Are you implying our mods are not neutral?
If you are so keen to involve Amazon posters in our discussions why don't you invite them to come here?
-
I'm quite happy posting here thank you - and have no complaints about the mods. Are you implying our mods are not neutral?
If you are so keen to involve Amazon posters in our discussions why don't you invite them to come here?
No worries.
Some are already on here I have been told.
As to the mods, some have stated they are clearly on the McCann's side.
Now why do you fear posting on Amazon ?
-
Okay, enough. Let's get back to The Topic.
-
He met Gerry when he was sucking on his lollipop. Two way mirror he would be behind not in the actual room when observing Kate in her interview.
"Jane Tanner, brought by fate into the bleak surroundings of the Leicester Police interview room, watched by both a video camera and, behind a two way mirror, the Portuguese police."
-
He met Gerry when he was sucking on his lollipop. Two way mirror he would be behind not in the actual room when observing Kate in her interview.
"Jane Tanner, brought by fate into the bleak surroundings of the Leicester Police interview room, watched by both a video camera and, behind a two way mirror, the Portuguese police."
Amaral was dismissed from the case on 2 October 2007. The rogatory interviews in the UK didn't take place until April 2008. I don't see the connection that you are trying to make.
And would a witness to an identity parade describe watching people in a line-up from behind a one-way mirror describe the situation as having met the people concerned?
-
Amaral was dismissed from the case on 2 October 2007. The rogatory interviews in the UK didn't take place until April 2008. I don't see the connection that you are trying to make.
And would a witness to an identity parade describe watching people in a line-up from behind a none-way mirror describe the situation as having met the people concerned?
The Portuguese have them as well so where do you think Amaral would be when observing the interviews?
-
The Portuguese have them as well so where do you think Amaral would be when observing the interviews?
Could someone post the original Portuguese phrases of what he actually said?
I suppose there could be translation issues depending on the words actually stated...
-
The Portuguese have them as well so where do you think Amaral would be when observing the interviews?
Erm... by April 2008, not present at rogatory interviews in the UK. Unless you have different information.
-
Am I the only one to find this thread droll?
We have two people known to have misspoken (as Hilary Clinton would have it!) and two groups of people debating which misspeaker is the worst or best misspeaker.
Hey ho 8(*(
-
Because of the assumption that he had met the Drs McCann, I think Mr Amaral must have realised at some point that it really did not suit his narrative that he did not have first hand knowledge of the couple he was accusing of a most heinous crime ... so from sofa to sofa ... interviewer to interviewer ... it was necessary to portray his version of the 'truth'.
Possibly he should have gone for a less sensational title for his 'penny dreadful'... then he might not have had to engineer suitable sound bites giving himself a role he never assumed while in charge of the investigation.
**snip
Q - You have a long career as an investigator, years in which you have faced criminals and innocents. What do you see when facing the McCanns?
A - They are two persons with much fear. I do not know if they fear to be discovered or fear the police of an unknown country.
Q – It was said that Kate was very cold. But I’ve seen her cry.
A - So did I. She is not cold. There was a moment, in a meeting with them, when we set out the sofa theory. Kate put her head down, looking distant, and, after a few seconds, she looked up again as if nothing had happened. She looked like she was escaping from the role that she was interpreting.
Q - When you raised the hypothesis that the girl might have died after falling off the sofa, did Kate McCann answer?
A - She did not answer, she just dropped her head for a moment, as if she was about to faint. She had an emotional collapse that lasted just a moment.
http://madeleinemccann.org/blog/2014/04/20/goncalo-amaral-the-interviews-augsep-08/#sthash.lUSqRwgf.dpuf
-
I notice that some people assume that if he wins the defamation case, the book will suddenly be re-published as a best-seller all over again, but this time in the even more lucrative anglophone markets.
I find that assumption quite bewildering. I really don't understand what planet these people live on.