The Cracked Mirror.

[Redblossom]

Men of that age, using glasses, speaking fluent English and Portuguese, and being around on the 3rd of May night after 11pm are very rare. Actually I think there's only Mr Marais, since Mr Murat was elsewhere as activity on his laptop seems to have proved.

Thats interesting. If they can prove he was on his computer at any time the tapas members said he was speaking to them,or around, then that would annul what they claimed. But this is so basic, you would think it would have been done already and shown in the files?

[Redblossom]

Mr Murat didn't know he was spied behind a van's glasses. This is illegal.

Oh I see I never knew all this. Thanks.

[DCI]

There's nothing in the files because it was illegal. Mr Murat could have protested and he would have won in court.

If it was illegal, why did Amaral set it up, Or stop it going ahead?

[Albertini]

If it was illegal, why did Amaral set it up, Or stop it going ahead?

He didn't. Bob small and Leicestershire police set it up and were present.

[Rachel Granada]

Can someone PLEASE educate me.... WHY do you people spend YOUR life discussing other peoples lives ???

Have you anything constructive to add to the debate, willo wisp?

[AnneGuedes]

Albertini might be right about SY proceeding by successive eliminations. Actually this is how the PJ proceeded. I was looking in GA's book whether he gave the date of Mr Smith's statement taken on the phone, and I found that :
Before (thinking in the eventual concealment of Madeleine's body), we had to exhaust all the leads related to the abduction thesis that had been imposed to us.

[DCI]

He didn't. Bob small and Leicestershire police set it up and were present.

So Amaral is a liar?

Before the search, WE want to assure ourselves that Jane Tanner recognises him as the individual she saw on the night of the disappearance. She is sitting inside an unmarked car, whose tinted windows allow her to see out without being spotted. The vehicle is parked at the exact spot where she was on the night of May 3rd. Robert Murat, anonymous amongst plain clothes police officers, goes up the road in the same way as the alleged abductor.

[Rachel Granada]

Albertini might be right about SY proceeding by successive eliminations. Actually this is how the PJ proceeded. I was looking in GA's book whether he gave the date of Mr Smith's statement taken on the phone, and I found that :
Before (thinking in the eventual concealment of Madeleine's body), we had to exhaust all the leads related to the abduction thesis that had been imposed to us.

You'd be better off reading Harry Potter than Amaral's book, Anne.

[Redblossom]

Can someone PLEASE educate me.... WHY do you people spend YOUR life discussing other peoples lives ???

I suppose you never discuss or take an interest in any one elses life,whether its your friends or neighbours, the news, cases in the media, real life crime stories,unsolved mysteries,watch tv etc
 

Edited

[Benice]

I am not twisting anything. I am looking at and explaining precisely what Ms Tanner has actually said.

It is perfectly obvious what she is saying when you consider the tense she uses in the verb "think".

"Think" is present tense, in other words, as she is sat there giving that Rogatory statement in 2008 she does not think it was him now.

"Thought" is past tense, in other words at some point in the past, and given the question she answered was related to the van episode episode, it is safe to conclude that she thought then on that night in 2007 in what  it was him.

So through the use of her words if she thought it was him when she was in the van she identified him. One thing is for sure Leicestershire Police will have a record of it.

Chinagirl, not only have you failed to rebut my explanation of her comments, you have failed to provide any explanation whatsoever of this apparent contradiction in Ms Tanner's words.

Benice if Amaral was wrong why did Ms Tanner, Bob Small Or Leciestershire Police never seek to challenge his words?

To both of you, it is not me who is desperate to twist her words. It is actually the supporters of the McCann's who have bet the ranch on Ms Tanner's sighting being genuine that any (more) damage to her credibility blows her sighting out of the water and the abduction with it.

If you think JT was telling the police officer that in 2007 she had identified Murat as the abductor, then explain why that officer doesn't even acknowledge that remarkable admission?  Just as remarkable is the fact that no other police officers who read that statement saw what you see either.
 
With regard to the van surveillance.- where is the witness statement?   And why is this positive identification,  (which without a doubt would have been the most important evidence Amaral had obtained against Murat) NOT mentioned as the No.1 reason for Murat being made an Arguido by the AG in the Final report?
 
I'm pretty sure that if Amaral resided in the UK and was telling this huge lie to all and sundry in TV chat shows and elsewhere as he does in Portugal, JT would have sued him.   
 
However IMO she has contented herself with the fact that Kate states quite clearly in her book that Amaral's claim that she positively identified Murat as the abductor 'is completely untrue'..    So what is more to the point is  -  if that is a big fat lie, why hasn't Amaral been shouting it from the rooftops, calling press conferences etc etc to announce that Kate McCann is a liar, has libelled him in her book and that he can prove.it.   I suspect nothing would have given him greater pleasure - and yet not a peep from him.
 
There is not a single credible reason why JT (or any of the others) would agree to risk ruining their own children's lives, by perjuring themselves and becoming accomplices in the disposal of the body of a dead child.      They would all have to be severely mentally deranged to even think about it.      As far as I know none of them were 'sectioned' on their return home, in fact I believe they all resumed their highly responsible jobs.
 

[DCI]

I suppose you never discuss or take an interest in any one elses life, the news, cases in the media, watch tv etc?
 

 

They don't know what this forum is for. 

[AnneGuedes]

Before taking this decision (raid in Mr Murat's villa), we undertook a recognition operation rather unofficial.

[AnneGuedes]

I'm pretty sure that if Amaral resided in the UK and was telling this huge lie to all and sundry in TV chat shows and elsewhere as he does in Portugal, JT would have sued him.   
 

No "imo" here, either you're Ms Tanner or you imagine you are.
Perhaps you should be careful before saying ex-inspector Amaral is a liar. Even if he's not a CR's client.
After Ms Tanner's recognition, the AG and the judge Frias went to Portimao Tribunal and decided to order a raid on Mr Murat's villa, which happened early morning the following day.

[AnneGuedes]

You'd be better off reading Harry Potter than Amaral's book, Anne.

Assez ennuyeux, l'un comme l'autre..

[AnneGuedes]

Though in criminal novels the murderer always comes back on the crime scene, one would wonder why Mr Murat, after abducting a little girl and instead of keeping her quiet, would be sneaking around. The point was that he had lied pretending not to be there, the trio found it suspicious and as they were three, that was it !
He introduced himself the following morning and likely a confusion was made between late night and early morning for people who hardly slept a wink. Mr O'Brien even suggests it.