Do The McCanns Trust Operation Grange to Do the Job ?

[debunker]

Challenge for you Debunker...you claim the AG didn't infer they lied...please prove it...CITE  ??   

No. The original asserter needs to prove it. They need to bring the original statement in Portuguese to the site rather than an inadequate translation by an amateur. The Portuguese word for lying does not appear in the original.

And no one claimed the word 'lied' was used. The meaning of the words that were used by the AG mean exactly that however.

Your post above:

"The AG also said the McCanns had lied about how often they checked on their children and that, by not taking part in he reconstruction, they had also failed to prove their innocence. Do you also agree with him on these points ?"

So have I claimed the word 'lied' was used in the dispatch ? The AG's words, however, carry the same meaning.

CIte for an accurate translation. If he did not use the word 'lie', what word did he use. The truth of the matter is that you do not know, so assume the worst for the McCanns as is your bias and the bias of the translators- this comes up time and again!.

If you want to insist that the AG said the McCanns lied (or anything close to it), please produce the original document.

And producing the original document would move the debate forward how ? You can't speak Portuguese so unless you are going bring a reputable, human,  translator, acceptable to both sides, to translate it, what would be the point ?

It would enable people to see that the Portuguese word for lying is not in the sentence.

If you do insist that the AJ called the McCanns liars, provide the information please. Else we shall have to conclude that you are lying (or mistaken!)

We have no been around the houses quite enough debunker so for clarification the AG stated the McCanns were untruthful regarding the checking of their children, therefore they lied. While he was much to polite to be quite so pointed that is what his words amounted to. That, because of senility or simple obtuseness, you refuse to take that on board is your problem and yours alone.

It is quite possible to be untruthful without telling lies.

If you wish to amend your allegation to the much softer suggestion that tehy may have been in error over the facts, then that is closer to the original.

The AG does not say that they lied.

The AG implies that they were knowingly untruthful. That is the difference.

Does the Portuguese say that?

Changing, slipping and sliding?

[ferryman]

It is quite possible to be untruthful without telling lies.

If you wish to amend your allegation to the much softer suggestion that tehy may have been in error over the facts, then that is closer to the original.

The AG does not say that they lied.

The AG implies that they were knowingly untruthful. That is the difference.

The proof is in the facts.

The McCanns and all their friends ran very regular checks on their children.

And I suppose the prosecutors were bound to offer some crumb to the doom-sayers ....

[faithlilly]

The AG inferred that they were economical with the truth as to how the children were monitored and other matters and in English this translates as they lied.  Simple logic easily understood.

Inferring that they were economical with the truth is not proof that he said that they were lying.

Since no-one else can be bothered, I will post the original

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P17/17_VOLUME_XVIIa_Page_4642.jpg

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P17/17_VOLUME_XVIIa_Page_4642.jpg


Second full paragraph, but needs to be read in context with the paragraphs around it.

Please post your translation debunker so we can all see clearly the point you are trying to make.

My Portuguese is not good enough to do a translation, but is good enough to not find the Portuguese word for 'lies'.

No one has claimed the AG used the word 'lies'. What he said was that they declared something they knew to be wrong ie they lied.

[John]

You are not interpreting the document properly Debunker.  It is not necessary to have the word 'lie' in the Report as there are many other ways to represent the same understanding. 

The Attorney General clearly challenges the evidence of the parents and calls into question their timings which if correct would not have allowed any abduction to take place.

As my specialism is Spanish maybe someone with Portuguese would like to have a go?

Tal denota que os país nao estavam persistentemente preocupados com os filhos, que nao iam fazer a sua verificacao como depois declararam efectuar, antes negligenciaram, embora nao temeraria, nem grosseiramente, o dever de guarda dos mesmos filhos.

Se tal dever de guarda tivesse sido observado, na hipotese de se ter tratado de um rapto, como insistentemente se referiu e continua a referir e e admissivel que tenha acontecido, a sua ocorrencia poderia ter sido eventualmente inviabilizada.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P17/17_VOLUME_XVIIa_Page_4642.jpg

[faithlilly]

The proof is in the facts.

The McCanns and all their friends ran very regular checks on their children.

And I suppose the prosecutors were bound to offer some crumb to the doom-sayers ....

Some crumb ? The prosecutor implied the statement of Mrs Fenn proves that the McCanns were, to put it charitably, knowingly untruthful when declaring that they checked on their children every half hour. That is not some crumb, that is a stonebaked, hand shaped premium sourdough loaf.

[John]

Would posters please shorten the quote history in their posts. Thank you.

[faithlilly]

You are not interpreting the document properly Debunker.  It is not necessary to have the word 'lie' in the Report as there are many other ways to represent the same understanding. 

The Attorney General clearly challenges the evidence of the parents and calls into question their timings which if correct would not have allowed any abduction to take place.

As my specialism is Spanish maybe someone with Portuguese would like to have a go?

Tal denota que os país nao estavam persistentemente preocupados com os filhos, que nao iam fazer a sua verificacao como depois declararam efectuar, antes negligenciaram, embora nao temeraria, nem grosseiramente, o dever de guarda dos mesmos filhos.

Se tal dever de guarda tivesse sido observado, na hipotese de se ter tratado de um rapto, como insistentemente se referiu e continua a referir e e admissivel que tenha acontecido, a sua ocorrencia poderia ter sido eventualmente inviabilizada.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P17/17_VOLUME_XVIIa_Page_4642.jpg

John someone fluent in Portuguese has translated it. I posted the translation earlier.

[debunker]

The AG inferred that they were economical with the truth as to how the children were monitored and other matters and in English this translates as they lied.  Simple logic easily understood.

Inferring that they were economical with the truth is not proof that he said that they were lying.

Since no-one else can be bothered, I will post the original

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P17/17_VOLUME_XVIIa_Page_4642.jpg

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P17/17_VOLUME_XVIIa_Page_4642.jpg


Second full paragraph, but needs to be read in context with the paragraphs around it.

Please post your translation debunker so we can all see clearly the point you are trying to make.

My Portuguese is not good enough to do a translation, but is good enough to not find the Portuguese word for 'lies'.

No one has claimed the AG used the word 'lies'. What he said was that they declared something they knew to be wrong ie they lied.

No. You said quite clearly that the AG said the McCanns lied. He did not say that.

[debunker]

You are not interpreting the document properly Debunker.  It is not necessary to have the word 'lie' in the Report as there are many other ways to represent the same understanding. 

The Attorney General clearly challenges the evidence of the parents and calls into question their timings which if correct would not have allowed any abduction to take place.

As my specialism is Spanish maybe someone with Portuguese would like to have a go?

Tal denota que os país nao estavam persistentemente preocupados com os filhos, que nao iam fazer a sua verificacao como depois declararam efectuar, antes negligenciaram, embora nao temeraria, nem grosseiramente, o dever de guarda dos mesmos filhos.

Se tal dever de guarda tivesse sido observado, na hipotese de se ter tratado de um rapto, como insistentemente se referiu e continua a referir e e admissivel que tenha acontecido, a sua ocorrencia poderia ter sido eventualmente inviabilizada.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P17/17_VOLUME_XVIIa_Page_4642.jpg

John someone fluent in Portuguese has translated it. I posted the translation earlier.

A previous forker fluent in Portuguese translated it.

[Carana]

The prosecutors were generally sound, but didn't get everything right.

This is, perhaps, a useful blog on checks:

http://madeleine-writingthewrongs.info/checks-on-the-children-the-mccanns-achilles-heel/

Would I be right in assuming that the things the AG didn't get right are the ones that paint the McCanns in a bad light ?

Not necessarily. I pointed out earlier that he'd got mixed up about when Matt and Russ went together to check (and thus when Jane actually went to replace Russ).

That mistake doesn't cast anyone in a bad light... he just got muddled up.

[DCI]

The prosecutors were generally sound, but didn't get everything right.

This is, perhaps, a useful blog on checks:

http://madeleine-writingthewrongs.info/checks-on-the-children-the-mccanns-achilles-heel/

Would I be right in assuming that the things the AG didn't get right are the ones that paint the McCanns in a bad light ?

Not necessarily. I pointed out earlier that he'd got mixed up about when Matt and Russ went together to check (and thus when Jane actually went to replace Russ).

That mistake doesn't cast anyone in a bad light... he just got muddled up.

Thats no excuse, Carana, for a supposed professional.
How many other times did he get muddled up?  8-)(--)

[faithlilly]

@ debunker

Please don't play semantics with me.

[faithlilly]

You are not interpreting the document properly Debunker.  It is not necessary to have the word 'lie' in the Report as there are many other ways to represent the same understanding. 

The Attorney General clearly challenges the evidence of the parents and calls into question their timings which if correct would not have allowed any abduction to take place.

As my specialism is Spanish maybe someone with Portuguese would like to have a go?

Tal denota que os país nao estavam persistentemente preocupados com os filhos, que nao iam fazer a sua verificacao como depois declararam efectuar, antes negligenciaram, embora nao temeraria, nem grosseiramente, o dever de guarda dos mesmos filhos.

Se tal dever de guarda tivesse sido observado, na hipotese de se ter tratado de um rapto, como insistentemente se referiu e continua a referir e e admissivel que tenha acontecido, a sua ocorrencia poderia ter sido eventualmente inviabilizada.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P17/17_VOLUME_XVIIa_Page_4642.jpg

John someone fluent in Portuguese has translated it. I posted the translation earlier.

A previous forker fluent in Portuguese translated it.

You have already admitted you do not speak Portuguese so on what basis do you suspect the translation posted is not accurate ? Because you disagree with it  ?

[Redblossom]

You will be telling me next that there is a translation problem with Mrs Fenn too and she was English.  She knew what she heard and she also knew when the patio door beneath her apartment opened and closed and the crying stopped.  Over an hour she said and was concerned enough to telephone her friend for advice as to what to do??  As a parent I find this appalling behaviour by the parents of young children and what makes it worse is that they are both qualified medical doctors who should have know better.

Well something is not right, either the translation is wrong, or Mrs Fenn was lying?

Yes, Mrs Fenn was English, but didn't speak or read the Portuguese language. It seems she knew what she heard, but didn't know what she said in her statement. The statement she contradicted the day after, when speaking on camera. So which statement do you believe, Angelo?

She did not contradict anything at all the next day, hard as you wish for this to be true, it will never be, all she said it was rubbish that she had spoken to journalists about it, so, yes, Mrs Fenn was not lying and there was no mistranslation

[debunker]

@ debunker

Please don't play semantics with me.

Words are important.

Saying someone lied is libel if incorrect. Saying someone was untruthful is not libel even if incorrect.

Lying requires a false statement with a clear intention to deceive. You misused the word. Suck it up.