The CCTV camera which Amaral claimed captured the image of the man carrying Madeleine.

[AnneGuedes]

I'm confused, Anne.

Dr Amaral talks on camera about this CCTV, as recorded in more than one documentary on this topic. (Sorry I am very busy tonight and don't have time to look them up).

Numerous stills exist of him photographed underneath the camera, lamenting the fact that his officers got there too late.

Isn't that the topic of this thread?

I never read a tabloid nor the pale Portuguese copy of it (O CdM), all I can say is that I never heard Mr Amaral speak of that CCTV as being a crucial point, possibly because the function of this private camera isn't to spot the whole street but the access from the street.
Until Mr Smith called, nobody knew that a carrier had been seen at the bottom of this road. Ms Tanner had from the very beginning attracted the attention on a carrier walking towards the opposite direction.
CCTVs are prohibited in the public space in Portugal. But private properties have a right to CCTV their accesses.

[Sherlock Holmes]

I never read a tabloid nor the pale Portuguese copy of it (O CdM), all I can say is that I never heard Mr Amaral speak of that CCTV as being a crucial point, possibly because the function of this private camera isn't to spot the whole street but the access from the street.
Until Mr Smith called, nobody knew that a carrier had been seen at the bottom of this road. Ms Tanner had from the very beginning attracted the attention on a carrier walking towards the opposite direction.
CCTVs are prohibited in the public space in Portugal. But private properties have a right to CCTV their accesses.

I am looking for the documentary in which I first learned of Amaral's comments on the camera.

Here is something in its place, meanwhile. The Express might not be literary enough for some, but the article here does contain what appear to be direct quotes from Amaral regarding his belief that the camera, property of the Estrela da Luz hotel, captured Smithman on his walk.

Those comments always struck me as significant because it is in their context that Amaral openly admits to his officers having made mistakes. He laments the fact that his officers got to the tape too late, after it had been recorded over.

(For ref: Here is the link. Forgot to include in initial posting: http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/210032/Madeleine-McCann-Did-the-camera-hold-vital-clue)

[Myster]

SH and Anne, the following links about the use of CCTV in Portugal may be of use to you...

https://www.privacyinternational.org/reports/portugal/ii-surveillance-policies#footnote19_sqqpfib

http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=abe5d676-67c0-4adb-81a5-ee4a026fb150

Paul Luckman interview concerning GA and the CCTV camera, etc...

http://www.onenewspage.co.uk/video/20131015/1454017/Paul-Luckman-describes-the-route-Madeleine-abductor.htm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KcIwprGp7Ew

[AnneGuedes]

SH and Anne, the following links about the use of CCTV in Portugal may be of use to you...

https://www.privacyinternational.org/reports/portugal/ii-surveillance-policies#footnote19_sqqpfib

http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=abe5d676-67c0-4adb-81a5-ee4a026fb150

Thank you, Myster !
The first link has broken links unfortunately or working links that have nothing to do with the matter.
But the second link is interesting, it shows that the private use (there's no public use except for high roads and cameras spot cars, not persons) of CCTVs is regulated : "it is not enough that workers witness the installation of the system because (…) this duty includes information about the purpose of the recordings, its scope, in terms of sound and image, as well as the display of a written warning, in addition to information on the period of time of conservation of the recordings".
I'm not sure that the private CCTV of the Estrela da Luz resort could spot the whole Escola Primaria street without a very large angle that would deform any image. Its purpose wasn't to spot fathers carrying their child back home but cars forcing the entrance to the resort, for instance.
If by chance the camera had spotted a child carrier who didn't enter in the resort, the image provided would hardly be usable like evidence. The exception would be crime prevention, security of individuals and property and as long as it is not considered an invasion of private life.
When the instruction judge, Pedro Frias, refused to the MP, the access to Mr McCann's deleted cell phone records, invasion of private life was the motive.
Nevertheless I guess that if the life of a person was at stake, the judge would have accepted.

[AnneGuedes]

Those comments always struck me as significant because it is in their context that Amaral openly admits to his officers having made mistakes. He laments the fact that his officers got to the tape too late, after it had been recorded over.

If you hunting mea culpa from the PJ, I can provide you with some... as well as intern critical views. Nobody's perfect, even in Portugal !

[icabodcrane]

When the instruction judge, Pedro Frias, refused to the MP, the access to Mr McCann's deleted cell phone records, invasion of private life was the motive.
Nevertheless I guess that if the life of a person was at stake, the judge would have accepted.

Sorry to snip your post Anne,  but I was struck by this last point you made

I was not aware that the Portuguese police  ( under privacy laws )  were denied access to the McCanns deleted phone records

Would Scotland Yard be be so restricted,  do we know   ? 

I recall reading that an important facet of the Yard's investigation was 'a forensic'  study of phone records ...  would that include information that was previously inaccessible, I wonder 

[Carana]

@ Myster

Thanks for those links. Interesting. From the first one:

Territorial privacy
Video surveillance

Law 207/200517 sets the means of any electronic (including video) surveillance for road safety used by law enforcement agencies.18 The system is limited to specific and determined purposes: catching traffic infractions, traffic control, locating stolen or illegal vehicles, and use as evidence of a crime.19 The installation of the surveillance methods should be directed, as much as possible, to capture images of vehicles.20 Information from the system may be released for didactic and statistical purposes, as long as no individuals or vehicles are identifiable.21 The CNPD published a clarification in response to many inquiries concerning the surveillance.22 The clarification states that according to the law these systems do not need CNPD approval. The equipment should be registered with the CNPD, and the make, model, and serial number of the surveillance equipment used is published on the CNPD website.

In 2006, Law 51/2006 on the use of video surveillance to monitor traffic as well as other incidents entered into force.23 That law grants permission to "Estradas de Portugal" (Roads of Portugal) to install roadway video surveillance equipment in the interests of road safety. All such installation is subjected, however, to the terms of Act No. 67/98, particularly the requirement of prior notification to the CNPD.

In August 2007, Portugal published a new law punishing improper handling of visual data with fines up to EUR 10,000 and directed captured images to be deleted if the threat did not actually materialise.24

In October 2008, three Portuguese cities were authorised to be equipped with CCTV cameras.25

On 14 July 2008, the CNPD issued an opinion on the use of video surveillance and set down conditions, including:
using the system at night if possible, not recording sound, and preventing private houses from being recorded.26


I don't see where it says that cameras can't be used on streets... The issue concerning restrictions seems to be the use that is actually made such images, as it is in many countries.

[Carana]

I am looking for the documentary in which I first learned of Amaral's comments on the camera.

Here is something in its place, meanwhile. The Express might not be literary enough for some, but the article here does contain what appear to be direct quotes from Amaral regarding his belief that the camera, property of the Estrela da Luz hotel, captured Smithman on his walk.

Those comments always struck me as significant because it is in their context that Amaral openly admits to his officers having made mistakes. He laments the fact that his officers got to the tape too late, after it had been recorded over.

Why does he blame his officers? He was the coordinator...

[AnneGuedes]

In October 2008, three Portuguese cities were authorised to be equipped with CCTV cameras.25

On 14 July 2008, the CNPD issued an opinion on the use of video surveillance and set down conditions, including:
using the system at night if possible, not recording sound, and preventing private houses from being recorded.26[/i]


I don't see where it says that cameras can't be used on streets... The issue concerning restrictions seems to be the use that is actually made such images, as it is in many countries.

Haven't you seen that the link 25 sends to a page with no information on this and that the link 26 goes nowhere ?
CCTVs aren't allowed in Portugal. And that's good !

[AnneGuedes]

Sorry to snip your post Anne,  but I was struck by this last point you made

I was not aware that the Portuguese police  ( under privacy laws )  were denied access to the McCanns deleted phone records

Would Scotland Yard be be so restricted,  do we know   ? 

I recall reading that an important facet of the Yard's investigation was 'a forensic'  study of phone records ...  would that include information that was previously inaccessible, I wonder

On the 21 of September, the instruction judge Pedro Frias rejected the request of the MP for access to the content of the messages sent and received by the group around the 3rd of May, with the justification that the allowance couldn't be retroactive. But, as the investigation was on an homicide, an abduction, a risky neglect or a concealment of cadaver, the three first crimes being sanctioned by more than 3 years of jail, and as it was important to determine when the child disappeared exactly and where were and what were doing the persons who were close to her, in order to confirm or exclude their involvement in the matter investigated, the judge authorized access to the list of calls received and sent by the group between the 28th of April and the 9th of September 2007. The MP launched an appeal in the Evora Court and lost it on 29th of April 2008.
I've no idea if SY is entitled to bypass that.

[AnneGuedes]

A poster repaired the link 25 :
Big Brother will be watching you...
in News · 25-10-2008 00:00:00 · 0 Comments

Public CCTV surveillance cameras have been authorized for three Portuguese cities, Oporto, Portimão and Fátima, a pioneering step in Portugal’s safety.   
A Home Affairs office source confirmed that the Ribeira do Porto, Praia da Rocha parking lot (Portimão), and Fátima’s Sanctuary have all been authorised to be equipped with CCTV systems.
The same source confirmed more requests are being looked into from the councils of Coimbra, Bragança and Lisbon.
CCTV systems in public places are only authorised by the Home Affairs office after the National Committee for Data Protection gives its approval.
2 private places.. The CCTV of the Ribeira of Porto (historical centre) were asked by an association. I don't know if they still exist. It was a one year experience in 2009.
http://www.jn.pt/paginainicial/pais/concelho.aspx?Distrito=Porto&Concelho=Porto&Option=Interior&content_id=1406031

[Sherlock Holmes]

Thank you, Myster !
The first link has broken links unfortunately or working links that have nothing to do with the matter.
But the second link is interesting, it shows that the private use (there's no public use except for high roads and cameras spot cars, not persons) of CCTVs is regulated : "it is not enough that workers witness the installation of the system because (…) this duty includes information about the purpose of the recordings, its scope, in terms of sound and image, as well as the display of a written warning, in addition to information on the period of time of conservation of the recordings".
I'm not sure that the private CCTV of the Estrela da Luz resort could spot the whole Escola Primaria street without a very large angle that would deform any image. Its purpose wasn't to spot fathers carrying their child back home but cars forcing the entrance to the resort, for instance.
If by chance the camera had spotted a child carrier who didn't enter in the resort, the image provided would hardly be usable like evidence. The exception would be crime prevention, security of individuals and property and as long as it is not considered an invasion of private life.
When the instruction judge, Pedro Frias, refused to the MP, the access to Mr McCann's deleted cell phone records, invasion of private life was the motive.
Nevertheless I guess that if the life of a person was at stake, the judge would have accepted.

This is certainly the impression we gather, considering Portuguese law on the matter.

Odd then that Amaral seems to be adamant that crucial information has been lost.

Not only that, he is very forward in conceding that his officers were negligent in not discovering the camera before the tape had been taped over.

Why so readily admit a flaw in his investigation when there was no information to be gleaned anyway?

[Sherlock Holmes]

Why does he blame his officers? He was the coordinator...

I also find this odd.

PS Thanks, Myster, for all that info. Has helped clear (a few!) things up.

[Cariad]

This is certainly the impression we gather, considering Portuguese law on the matter.

Odd then that Amaral seems to be adamant that crucial information has been lost.

Not only that, he is very forward in conceding that his officers were negligent in not discovering the camera before the tape had been taped over.

Why so readily admit a flaw in his investigation when there was no information to be gleaned anyway?

I imagine that it was because a child was missing and any chance of information was to be grabbed, no matter how slim that chance was.

[Carana]

Haven't you seen that the link 25 sends to a page with no information on this and that the link 26 goes nowhere ?
CCTVs aren't allowed in Portugal. And that's good !

Could you help to find where it is stated that CCTVs or surveillance cameras aren't allowed in Portugal? How are roads monitored for traffic accidents, for example?

What would you classify the webcams (links at the top of this forum) as?