The Cracked Mirror.

[ferryman]

Notice the quotation marks around the phrase.

I'm trying to simplify the terms for you so you understand what a public prosecutor is (clue, not a Judge) because it doesn't appear to be going in at your end.

From the post timed at 1041:

Because if you did you would know that a District Attorney / Public Prosecutor has no powers...

Quotation mark?

[Albertini]

From the post timed at 1041:

Because if you did you would know that a District Attorney / Public Prosecutor has no powers...

Quotation mark?

Yes at the first mention of the phrase in my post you quoted you will notice it is encased with quotation marks.

A Public Prosecutor is the same as a District Attorney in terms of scope and remit. Neither are Judges, neither have the power to bestow guilt or innocence. They prosecute for the public good.

Are you clear on this now, or do you need more explanation?

Do you now want to try and rebutt what i have said, rather than attempting to go off at a tangent and avoiding the points i have made.

I'm really trying to help you through this but i suspect you are being deliberately obtuse here.

So rebutt away...... I'm waiting.

[Carana]

Definitions of the role of District Attorney / Public Prosecutor differ according to jurisdictions.


Here is a link about the Public Prosecutor's role in Portugal, if this is of any assistance.

http://www.euro-justice.com/member_states/portugal/country_report/2811/

[Albertini]

Definitions of the role of District Attorney / Public Prosecutor differ according to jurisdictions.


Here is a link about the Public Prosecutor's role in Portugal, if this is of any assistance.

http://www.euro-justice.com/member_states/portugal/country_report/2811/

The intervention of the investigating judge, as inspector of the legality of acts, is never ex officio but takes place at the request of the prosecution service or of the police to check the validity of these acts (Sects. 268 and 269 CCP).

This involvement is justified by the fact that no one other than a judge may order acts which affect rights, freedom and guarantees protected by the Constitution (Sects. 268 and 269 CCP).

[ferryman]

Definitions of the role of District Attorney / Public Prosecutor differ according to jurisdictions.


Here is a link about the Public Prosecutor's role in Portugal, if this is of any assistance.

http://www.euro-justice.com/member_states/portugal/country_report/2811/

Couldn't see anything in there about district attorneys.  However, this is interesting:

However, whilst taking into consideration the lack of means available to the public prosecutor, the specialisation of police officers; and the need to preserve police technical and tactical autonomy, the Prosecutor-General supervises the exercise of intervention powers of the prosecution service in the following ways:
-    if the crime under investigation carries a statutory prison sentence not exceeding five years, the prosecution service should only interfere if it can be justified under special circumstances. For instance, the quality of the police officers, the victims or the particular circumstances around their practices;
-    if the crime carries a statutory prison sentence of more than five years in prison, the prosecution service will intervene directly in the investigation, analysing the crime, defining the procedures of the investigation or even participating in it.

The McCanns, supposedly, were under investigation for the crime of finding and concealing a body with the intention of concealing, also, the fact of a death.

And isn't that supposed to carry a sentence of just two years?

[Carana]

Aside from the role of a judge in general, the extracts that you posted concern an investigating judge.

In some jurisdictions, the PP will appoint an investigating judge (or magistrate) to - officially, at least - lead the police investigation.

Without wading through hundreds of pages, I have no idea whether an investigating judge in Portugal would be the same judge overseeing a case in a trial. I doubt it, but I haven't checked. Perhaps you have. If so, please share.

[Carana]

Couldn't see anything in there about district attorneys.  However, this is interesting:

However, whilst taking into consideration the lack of means available to the public prosecutor, the specialisation of police officers; and the need to preserve police technical and tactical autonomy, the Prosecutor-General supervises the exercise of intervention powers of the prosecution service in the following ways:
-    if the crime under investigation carries a statutory prison sentence not exceeding five years, the prosecution service should only interfere if it can be justified under special circumstances. For instance, the quality of the police officers, the victims or the particular circumstances around their practices;
-    if the crime carries a statutory prison sentence of more than five years in prison, the prosecution service will intervene directly in the investigation, analysing the crime, defining the procedures of the investigation or even participating in it.

The McCanns, supposedly, were under investigation for the crime of finding and concealing a body with the intention of concealing, also, the fact of a death.

And isn't that supposed to carry a sentence of just two years?

Hmmm. I have my doubts about that one.

The crime being investigated was a child's unexplained disappearance - which could be a potential stranger abduction / paedo gang/ murder (whoever may have been responsible). Wouldn't that activate the necessity for the prosecution service to appoint an investigating judge?

What's not clear to me is how active an investigating judge in Portugal would actually be in such a case - would that person have been actively directing the police investigation, or pointing out the more mundane aspects, such as ensuring that "interpreters" had signed the relevant form, or authorising search warrants?

[Carana]

Perhaps a legal eagle here with some understanding of the Portuguese system actually works could help here.

[ferryman]

Hmmm. I have my doubts about that one.

The crime being investigated was a child's unexplained disappearance - which could be a potential stranger abduction / paedo gang/ murder (whoever may have been responsible). Wouldn't that activate the necessity for the prosecution service to appoint an investigating judge?

What's not clear to me is how active an investigating judge in Portugal would actually be in such a case - would that person have been actively directing the police investigation, or pointing out the more mundane aspects, such as ensuring that "interpreters" had signed the relevant form, or authorising search warrants?

You mean you doubt Harrison's word?

Why is that?

He says in his report that he considered solely the possibility that Madeleine had been murdered and offered to consider other possibilities or scenarios on request.

Arguably the most fraudulent claim (of many!) in Amaral's book is the claim that Harrison changed the investigation into one for a little girl presumed dead.

Harrison did no such thing.

This report considers solely the possibility that Madeleine McCann has been murdered and her body is concealed within the areas previously searched by Police in Zone 1 around Praia Da Luz. Other scenarios or possibilities may on request be considered and be subject of a further report.

(Mark Harrison)

[Carana]

You mean you doubt Harrison's word?

Why is that?

He says in his report that he considered solely the possibility that Madeleine had been murdered and offered to consider other possibilities or scenarios on request.

Arguably the most fraudulent claim (of many!) in Amaral's book is the claim that Harrison changed the investigation into one for a little girl presumed dead.

Harrison did no such thing.

This report considers solely the possibility that Madeleine McCann has been murdered and her body is concealed within the areas previously searched by Police in Zone 1 around Praia Da Luz. Other scenarios or possibilities may on request be considered and be subject of a further report.

(Mark Harrison)

That's not what I said. Harrison was lending his services to investigate concrete possibilities in the hypothesis that she had been murdered. Yes. But would that have changed the official hierarchical link between the PP/investigating judge/magistrate and the police? That is what I doubt.

In some jurisdictions, the police take the lead in an investigation (e.g., UK); in others the prosecution service is the lead and appoints an investigating judge, on their behalf, to lead the police, who then report back up and instruct back down.

Depending on how the system works in various countries, the investigating judge may play an active role in directing the police, or a relatively passive one in ensuring that whatever the police are doing conforms with the law, but otherwise lets the police get on with the investigation.

At least that's my understanding.

If anyone with legal expertise on how the Portuguese legal system works is on here, perhaps they would like to clarify. And I'd be interested in both how it's supposed to work in theory, and in practice.

[ferryman]

If the magistrate presiding was directing the PJ to investigate all these other possibilities, why was the PJ directing Harrison to investigate, alone, murder?

Isn't it most likely that Amaral simply lied?

[Jean-Pierre]

You mean you doubt Harrison's word?

Why is that?

He says in his report that he considered solely the possibility that Madeleine had been murdered and offered to consider other possibilities or scenarios on request.

Arguably the most fraudulent claim (of many!) in Amaral's book is the claim that Harrison changed the investigation into one for a little girl presumed dead.

Harrison did no such thing.

This report considers solely the possibility that Madeleine McCann has been murdered and her body is concealed within the areas previously searched by Police in Zone 1 around Praia Da Luz. Other scenarios or possibilities may on request be considered and be subject of a further report.

(Mark Harrison)

I agree with that Ferryman.   The report was quite clear that he was following a particular brief, and was therefore confined to that brief.

Amaral appeared to morph that into a specific conclusion by Harrison.

He also managed to misinterpret the FSS report.

I do wonder how this chap ever managed to become a detective.

[AnneGuedes]

...whilst in the AG's opinion there was no evidence based on the collected evidence so far (but remember the investigation was incomplete), as suspects they had still not demonstrated their innocence (those are the AG's words not mine).

Yes, but we have to admit that the evidence has to be extremely solid in a case involving people who 1) are foreigners (scrutiny of their country authorities), 2) have obtained the status of victims thanks to very well orchestrated media campaigns and 3) have been outrageously suspected by incompetent police (in order to save the face) ITO
The PGR could have used legal means to force the witnesses to come back and reconstruct. It would have taken time and likely was not worthwhile : unwilling to do it, they would mess it. This also is likely why the McCanns weren't not questioned again.
The negative result of the MP reconstruction initiative (like the systematic defensive position of Mrs McCann concerning the 48 questions) is nevertheless a darkness engraved in stone.

[DCI]

I agree with that Ferryman.   The report was quite clear that he was following a particular brief, and was therefore confined to that brief.

Amaral appeared to morph that into a specific conclusion by Harrison.

He also managed to misinterpret the FSS report.

I do wonder how this chap ever managed to become a detective.

 

[Carana]

If the magistrate presiding was directing the PJ to investigate all these other possibilities, why was the PJ directing Harrison to investigate, alone, murder?

Isn't it most likely that Amaral simply lied?

It may depend on how active a role the investigating magistrate was actually playing. Was it actively leading the investigation (I don't get that impression), or was it was just rubber-stamping search warrants, interpreter forms, and authorising phone-tapping?

I'm not criticising the magistrate as I don't know exactly what role they are supposed to play (active or mainly passive?), nor how many other cases they may have had to deal with at the same time.