New German suspect in Madeleine McCann mystery disappearance.

[The General]

https://www.defence-barrister.co.uk/disclosure-in-criminal-cases

[Mr Gray]

https://www.defence-barrister.co.uk/disclosure-in-criminal-cases

from your link..

When does the duty to disclose commence?
The statutory duty under the CPIA commences once the defendant (in the Magistrates’ Court) has pleaded not guilty and the case has been adjourned for trial or (for cases going to the Crown Court) once the case has been sent for trial to the Crown Court (see s.1 CPIA).




I think germany is similar to Portugal where once questioned as an arguido a suspect must be told of all the evidence against them. Thats how we know all the evidence the PJ had against the McCanns.

[Vertigo Swirl]

https://www.defence-barrister.co.uk/disclosure-in-criminal-cases

Not sure if this was aimed at me or not as you're supposed to be ignoring my posts but if it was and you're reading this The General I was not referring to the defendants (obviously they have a right to know the evidence against them) I was referring to the general public, you, me and the rest of the busy bodies on this forum.  Why do WE expect to be informed of the evidence against a suspect prior to charges or a court case?  It seems there is an expectation that HCW will reveal all to the world's press and if he doesn't then that must mean there is none.  What an illogical argument if I may say so. 

[jassi]

Not sure if this was aimed at me or not as you're supposed to be ignoring my posts but if it was and you're reading this The General I was not referring to the defendants (obviously they have a right to know the evidence against them) I was referring to the general public, you, me and the rest of the busy bodies on this forum.  Why do WE expect to be informed of the evidence against a suspect prior to charges or a court case?  It seems there is an expectation that HCW will reveal all to the world's press and if he doesn't then that must mean there is none.  What an illogical argument if I may say so.

Are you saying that nobody, other than the defendant, should be party to such evidence ?

[Vertigo Swirl]

Are you saying that nobody, other than the defendant, should be party to such evidence ?

Is that what I'm saying dear Jassi, is it really?

[kizzy]

We will find out in the next two or three months...

Think we will find out sooner than that.

You can always live in hope though.D

[jassi]

Is that what I'm saying dear Jassi, is it really?

I don't know - that's why i'm asking.

[Mr Gray]

Think we will find out sooner than that.

You can always live in hope though.D

Isn't that what you are doing...

[Vertigo Swirl]

I don't know - that's why i'm asking.

I'm just curious to know why you would need to ask me if that's what I meant when my meaning was very clear.  "I was referring to the general public, you, me and the rest of the busy bodies on this forum.  Why do WE expect to be informed of the evidence against a suspect prior to charges or a court case?"  I don't think I said that the only person who should know the evidence should be the defendant did I?  Obviously the prosecution would know the evidence too!  Remember the couple who got arrested and charged for killing their daughter last week?  Did the prosecutor have to run the evidence past the general public first?  No it did not.  Is the country demanding to be told the evidence prior to the court case?  Not that I'm aware.  Are there people on forums scoffing and jeering that there is no evidence in that case simply because they have not been told what it is?  Well, probably, but that's people on forums for you...

[Angelo222]

Yet more confirmation from Herr Wolters of the McCanns' innocence

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/12722481/madeleine-mccann-parents-cleared-german-police/

This is so predictable. The German cops weren't there in 2007, they have never interrogated the parents or had any first-hand contact with original witnesses whereas Amaral and his team had such access. The Germans come to this investigation years later and only have access to files which most of us have already seen so their boasts and claims are not in the least credible.

In my view their conduct is reprehensible and brings nothing to the enquiry.

[Vertigo Swirl]

This is so predictable. The German cops weren't there in 2007, they have never interrogated the parents or had any first-hand contact with original witnesses whereas Amaral and his team had such access. The Germans come to this investigation years later and only have access to files which most of us have already seen so their boasts and claims are not in the least credible.

In my view their conduct is reprehensible and brings nothing to the enquiry.

Do you have a cite for this?  No, thought not.

[kizzy]

I dont see why they have to put mccs cleared when it is supposed to be about CB.

IMO they seem to be opening a can of worms - and covering there backs as mccs, not their suspects.

It doesn't make sense that they have to make a point of it when it is CB they are investigating.

[Mr Gray]

This is so predictable. The German cops weren't there in 2007, they have never interrogated the parents or had any first-hand contact with original witnesses whereas Amaral and his team had such access. The Germans come to this investigation years later and only have access to files which most of us have already seen so their boasts and claims are not in the least credible.

In my view their conduct is reprehensible and brings nothing to the enquiry.

Amaral and his team didn't understand the evidence... Which means their conclusions were flawed imo
The pj we're there when the rape took place... The Germans weren't.. But the Germans solved it... The pj didnt

[kizzy]

Quite the contrary.

I think the present investigators from all three national police forces are doing an excellent job. 

Although I must admit to being dismayed at the beginning of the year when it became obvious that someone in the Policia Judiciaria has been giving confidential information about the investigation to a member of the public.

Not only is that unethical, it is illegal.

that someone in the Policia Judiciaria has been giving confidential information about the investigation to a member of the public.

What confidential information was that - do you know it was confidential whatever it is your on about.

Who was the member of the public?

[Mr Gray]

I dont see why they have to put mccs cleared when it is supposed to be about CB.

IMO they seem to be opening a can of worms - and covering there backs as mccs, not their suspects.

It doesn't make sense that they have to make a point of it when it is CB they are investigating.

He was responding to amarals interference