Hey, I'm only working from and explaining what Jane Tanner ACTUALLY SAID, not what you want her to say to fit your pre conceived ideas.
In your heart you also must know it rings true as other members of the group at the same time were identifying Murat as well.
As Anna has explained the whole process was in, Anna's words, illegal, although i was always under the impression it was more inadmissible, but i bow to Anna as she knows far more about Portuguese law than i do.
That's why i would imagine there are no files in the PJ files and that's why it was Bob Small in the van and not Amaral.
Amaral can't win can he. The supporters of the family are now shouting "typical Amaral, making a mess of the id and doing something illegal".
When in actual fact he was moving heaven and earth at that point to try and find the child as fast as he could.
Can you imagine the outcry from the same family supporters had Murat actually had the child and Amaral had not done this?
In relation to what Kate says in her book, as she is a proven and self admitted liar (page 206 i believe of the book Madeleine) I'm not inclined to believe what she says and as i have said the other members of the Tapas mob were identifying Murat at the same time.
Maybe you should inform SY that Jane Tanner admitted in her statement that she had identified Murat as the abductor - as they seem to have missed that momentous news.
The idea that discrepancies can only indicate that someone is lying is wrong. This is what the police officer interviewing Jane Tanner says on the subject:
Quote
4078 “It’s alright. I can fully understand why you have so much frustration. And, in as much as the part where Gerry thinks he was standing somewhere slightly different to where you saw him, well that, you know,
people do see things from different perspectives”.Reply “Umm”.
4078 “You know, we can take a statement from people, if an incident happened outside and there was a group of people watching it,
everybody would have a different take on what they had seen”.Reply “Umm”.
4078 “And that, you know, it doesn’t matter.
You can only say what you can remember and as far as you can remember it. And if it is different from how it was then things can be explained”.
Unquote
It is
that fact that the sceptics always ignore - but insist that every single word of every statement is set in stone and can never be deviated from. Fortunately at least the UK police are well aware that that is simply not the case - when you are dealing with people trying to recall events.
IMO Amaral was moving heaven and earth to get a conviction. Whether it was in haste because the world was watching or whether it was normal procedure for him - he decided who was guilty first and then tried to fit the evidence round it instead of examining the evidence and then deciding who could be guilty on the strength of it.
I'm not surprised Amaral kept well away from the unlawful surveillance. Did Bob Small know he was participating in an illegal act?
As a police officer, Amaral's blatent disregard for the law when it suited him, is disgraceful- especially when the McCanns and others were being warned of dire consequences if they did the same.. (secrecy laws?).
Your 'evidence' that Kate McCann is a proven liar is truly laughable. By the same token the vast majority of the adult population must be proven liars too. Who hasn't, at some time, changed or avoided an arrangement/appointment/date by giving a reason which was not strictly true or as in Kate's case was a slight exaggeration of the truth?
Once again you will not allow the McCanns to do what you accept without question is perfectly normal for the rest of us.
