Why didn't Kate McCann answer the questions of the PJ?

[AnneGuedes]

A formal or informal interview seems to be missing from the files.

Hi Redblossom ! You're right, they had an informal interview on August 8 (the day after the samples were sent to Birmingham) referred to by GMC (blog) : At our meeting with the Portuguese police today we reaffirmed that we have to believe Madeleine is alive until there is concrete evidence to the contrary. Yet there's nothing in the files.

[Mr Gray]

she realised that the pj simply wanted to continue questioning so as to incriminate her.

This is pure defamation.

Amaral has stated in his book that the entire pj believed that Maddie died in the appt and the McCanns covered it up..... thats defamation

[AnneGuedes]

AnneGuedes.  Considering the questions that the PJ put to Mrs McCann as an aguida, wherethey honest and truthful about the "evidence" they held?

"--- Signalled the presence of human blood in the trunk of the same vehicle, she said that she can not explain anything more than that already mentioned.
--- Confronted with the result of the collection of DNA from MADELEINE, which analysis was carried out by a British laboratory, from behind the sofa and trunk of the vehicle, situations previously described, she said that she can not explain anything more than that already mentioned."

I would suggest that on this basis Davel would be making "fair comment".

They said Keela found blood in the car, they didn't affirm it was Madeleine's and KMC had the right to answer what she did.
Did they speak of "the result of the collection of DNA of Madeleine" ? It doesn't make sense,  Collected DNA as well doesn't. I have to check on the Portuguese original.

[AnneGuedes]

she realised that the pj simply wanted to continue questioning so as to incriminate her.

This is pure defamation.

Amaral has stated in his book that the entire pj believed that Maddie died in the appt and the McCanns covered it up..... thats defamation

The PJ inspectors could believe what they wanted, but they certainly didn't say "we believe Madeleine died in the flat et we'll question you in order to incriminate you" !
This is pure speculation, eventually defamation.

[Redblossom]

A formal or informal interview seems to be missing from the files.

Hi Redblossom ! You're right, they had an informal interview on August 8 (the day after the samples were sent to Birmingham) referred to by GMC (blog) : At our meeting with the Portuguese police today we reaffirmed that we have to believe Madeleine is alive until there is concrete evidence to the contrary. Yet there's nothing in the files.

Thanks Anne, that would make sense. As it was straight after the dogs deployment in early August, except for question 47 which could not have been asked at an August meeting as the DNA results didnt go through till September.

I am surprised that even informal interviews were not recorded though, especially or at least by that stage.


ETA @ davel, since when have police officers beliefs or conclusions working on a case, defamation?

[AnneGuedes]

she realised that the pj simply wanted to continue questioning so as to incriminate her.

This is pure defamation.

Pure defamation why?

Where is the evidence that the McCanns wanted to put Madeleine up for adoption (one of the questions)?

Why not, instead of having police inspectors interviewing persons of interest in a hot case of missing child, have persons of interest interviewing police inspectors about their motives to interview them ?

[Mr Gray]

she realised that the pj simply wanted to continue questioning so as to incriminate her.

This is pure defamation.

Amaral has stated in his book that the entire pj believed that Maddie died in the appt and the McCanns covered it up..... thats defamation

The PJ inspectors could believe what they wanted, but they certainly didn't say "we believe Madeleine died in the flat et we'll question you in order to incriminate you" !
This is pure speculation, eventually defamation.

Have you read the questions?
what is your medical speciality?
have you ever done shift work?

how are those questions going to help catch an abductor?
talking of defamation, Amaral has been described as a bent, disgraced cop in the uk. The uk is the easiest country in europe to sue for defamation. why hasn't he sued? perhaps he has no defence.

[debunker]

she realised that the pj simply wanted to continue questioning so as to incriminate her.

This is pure defamation.

Of whom.

[AnneGuedes]

Have you read the questions?
what is your medical speciality?
have you ever done shift work?

how are those questions going to help catch an abductor?
talking of defamation, Amaral has been described as a bent, disgraced cop in the uk. The uk is the easiest country in europe to sue for defamation. why hasn't he sued? perhaps he has no defence.

I"ve read the questions, yes.
I'm not a doctor.
I never did shift work.
See how I answer your questions ! Am I not nice ?
The questions asked to Mrs McCann were not properly intending to catch an abductor, but to confirm or eliminate the abduction hypothesis. For example in the first question KMC was asked what she touched when she entered the bed room. Had she said "I went to the window to look outside", then her fingerprints on the window would gain some justification.

[icabodcrane]

The suggestion that Kate McCann was being  'framed'  by the police is quite a ridiculous one, to me

This case was being watched on rolling 24 hour news  ...  senior  politicians, including Prime Ministers were involved ... diplomats and seconded government officials were on hand ...  celebrities and millionaire backers were watching with interest  ...  the world's press were primed and ready to go at a moment's notice

This case  ...  of all cases ...  was at minimum risk of police wrong-doing

 

[Redblossom]

Exactly

[ferryman]

You may be a little surprised by this response, but I don't altogether disagree with you.

Ultimately, the McCanns were exonerated, which clearly they wouldn't have been if there had been a mindset to frame the McCanns.

As I've pointed out elsewhere, it is considered a legitimate police tactic to put psychological pressure on suspects to try to make them crack: the rationale being that if they have nothing to hide, they won't crack.

And there was some genuinely fine work done, much of it on the Portuguese side.  PJ Inspector Dias in particular was very astute.  And witness statements, taken by Portuguese policemen, went a long way to establishing that neither the McCanns, nor their friends, had anything to answer for.

In the very earliest stages, I think those Portuguese dog handlers were a (genuine) credit to their profession.

The Portuguese prosecutors deserve mention, too.  They were even-handed and fair ...

So yes, I think a great deal that is credit

[faithlilly]

A formal or informal interview seems to be missing from the files.

Hi Redblossom ! You're right, they had an informal interview on August 8 (the day after the samples were sent to Birmingham) referred to by GMC (blog) : At our meeting with the Portuguese police today we reaffirmed that we have to believe Madeleine is alive until there is concrete evidence to the contrary. Yet there's nothing in the files.

And Kate's book totally contradicts Gerry's blog.

[faithlilly]

she realised that the pj simply wanted to continue questioning so as to incriminate her.

This is pure defamation.

Amaral has stated in his book that the entire pj believed that Maddie died in the appt and the McCanns covered it up..... thats defamation

The PJ inspectors could believe what they wanted, but they certainly didn't say "we believe Madeleine died in the flat et we'll question you in order to incriminate you" !
This is pure speculation, eventually defamation.

Have you read the questions?
what is your medical speciality?
have you ever done shift work?

how are those questions going to help catch an abductor?
talking of defamation, Amaral has been described as a bent, disgraced cop in the uk. The uk is the easiest country in europe to sue for defamation. why hasn't he sued? perhaps he has no defence.

Perhaps he doesn't have a fund with which to pay for libel litigation ?

[amaraltheofficeboy]

And Kate's book totally contradicts Gerry's blog.

what a b....r eh?