Why did the Portuguese Police not come to UK to interview witnesses?

[debunker]

So where are we on this one?

Do we agree that members of the PJ did indeed visit the UK to attend at least some rogatory interviews?

FRom memory there were PJ officers observing and asking for supplementaries in all the rogatories. They were not allowed to address thewitnesses directly.

[Carana]

Mr. Rebelo left because the interviews were a joke (as can be seen in the case files) where the LP agents told the interviewees what they had said before and asked if they maintained or changed their versions. Some even revealed what their spouses had testified in order to make them correct their versions...it was absolutely shameful.

I'm curious about what I placed in bold, Luz. Doesn't this happen in Portugal?

[debunker]

Mr. Rebelo left because the interviews were a joke (as can be seen in the case files) where the LP agents told the interviewees what they had said before and asked if they maintained or changed their versions. Some even revealed what their spouses had testified in order to make them correct their versions...it was absolutely shameful.

I'm curious about what I placed in bold, Luz. Doesn't this happen in Portugal?

AS I pointed out atthe time ( to much [ censored word ] disparagement) they would have been allowed to review their evidence and halt the inte reviews at any time as they were not under any compulsionto give evidence.

[Carana]

Mr. Rebelo left because the interviews were a joke (as can be seen in the case files) where the LP agents told the interviewees what they had said before and asked if they maintained or changed their versions. Some even revealed what their spouses had testified in order to make them correct their versions...it was absolutely shameful.

I'm curious about what I placed in bold, Luz. Doesn't this happen in Portugal?

AS I pointed out atthe time ( to much [ censored word ] disparagement) they would have been allowed to review their evidence and halt the inte reviews at any time as they were not under any compulsionto give evidence.

Debunker, my original post did not contain a smiley. I presume that this was a keyboard error of punctuation.

[Carana]

@ Debunker, on the substance of my question, I am still interested in a reply from Luz.

[debunker]

Mr. Rebelo left because the interviews were a joke (as can be seen in the case files) where the LP agents told the interviewees what they had said before and asked if they maintained or changed their versions. Some even revealed what their spouses had testified in order to make them correct their versions...it was absolutely shameful.

Odd as I don't use smilies.

I am on a small tabletso Icould have dragged my finger.
Sorry.




I'm curious about what I placed in bold, Luz. Doesn't this happen in Portugal?

AS I pointed out atthe time ( to much [ censored word ] disparagement) they would have been allowed to review their evidence and halt the inte reviews at any time as they were not under any compulsionto give evidence.

Debunker, my original post did not contain a smiley. I presume that this was a keyboard error of punctuation.

[John]

There is no legal procedure for Portuguese police to interview in England - they have to use rogatory interviews carried out by English police; they must provide a set of questions and are allowed to ask limited supplementaries via the UK interviewers. This is a voluntary process- no one can be forced to present themselves for interview.

WHen this process was being organised, the [ censored word ]s were jumping up and down celebrating their false view that the police would be arresting the McCanns And the Tapas group, dragging them to police cells, and coercing the "truth" out of the- they knew nothing of the law and laughed at my posts saying that Portuguese police would be observers, written notice of questions were required in advance, the interviewees would be legally represented, would not be compelled to attend or remain at interview and could leave at any time if they wished. All true.

Mr. Rebelo left because the interviews were a joke (as can be seen in the case files) where the LP agents told the interviewees what they had said before and asked if they maintained or changed their versions. Some even revealed what their spouses had testified in order to make them correct their versions...it was absolutely shameful.

But we have experience with the lack of co-operation from the UK when their subjects are in trouble with our laws. So it was not a surprise when the Home Office took almost an year to agree to those disgraceful interviews since in 2007 it already had practically denied to provide information about the suspects.

An excellent post Luz, a pity you spoiled it all by reverting to name calling later on...naughty!

[Eleanor]

The information demanded was too intrusive, and The PJ were advised to apply for less intrusive information.  They never did.

The Rogatory Interviews were delayed because The Portuguese Applications were not legally correct.  This is important because any information obtained from an illegal application is nul and void and cannot be used in a Court of Law.

Mr. Smith was not subjected to a Rogatory Interview because the application for his presence was made to The UK.  Mr. Smith is a Citizen of Eire and therefor not a UK Citizen.