Author Topic: Was the GNR response appropriate?  (Read 5592 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Mo Stache

Re: Was the GNR response appropriate?
« Reply #15 on: July 30, 2013, 07:52:49 PM »
Do you real want me to list the reasons why this article has no credibility at all ? Shall we start from the fact it was written long before the release of the files and go from there ?
You mean like the credibility attached to Amarals book also written long before the release of the files. And go from there?

Redblossom

  • Guest
Re: Was the GNR response appropriate?
« Reply #16 on: July 30, 2013, 07:57:27 PM »
You mean like the credibility attached to Amarals book also written long before the release of the files. And go from there?

Alot of knowledge is better than NO knowledge


Offline Mo Stache

Re: Was the GNR response appropriate?
« Reply #17 on: July 30, 2013, 07:59:17 PM »
Alot of knowledge is better than NO knowledge
Incorrect knowledge is no knowledge at all.

Offline DCI

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2585
  • Total likes: 6
  • Why are some folks so sick in the head!!!
Re: Was the GNR response appropriate?
« Reply #18 on: July 30, 2013, 08:01:50 PM »
You mean like the credibility attached to Amarals book also written long before the release of the files. And go from there?

Amarals book must have been written, well before the files were released, Mo. So what was he doing with police files, after he was removed from the case in October 2007.
He used files and photo's, that were under the secrecy law, and not released. Then again that didn't stop Felicia Cabrita getting her mitts on them, as early as May 2007, did it?
Kate's 500 Mile Cycle Challenge

https://www.justgiving.com/KateMcCann/

Offline Mo Stache

Re: Was the GNR response appropriate?
« Reply #19 on: July 30, 2013, 08:07:12 PM »
Amarals book must have been written, well before the files were released, Mo. So what was he doing with police files, after he was removed from the case in October 2007.
He used files and photo's, that were under the secrecy law, and not released. Then again that didn't stop Felicia Cabrita getting her mitts on them, as early as May 2007, did it?
Yes. And exactly the point I have been making on the other thread.

Redblossom

  • Guest
Re: Was the GNR response appropriate?
« Reply #20 on: July 31, 2013, 07:12:17 PM »
Amarals book must have been written, well before the files were released, Mo. So what was he doing with police files, after he was removed from the case in October 2007.


Which police files? As I asked umpteen times,which police files was he privy to post October 07, which he included in his book which was written with info he had up until then

None
Just nit picking rubbish, and  if you  think he committed any judicial secrecy crime, why dont you ask for Tanner to be prosecuted for it? Seeing as she broke it, and six months! Not 3 days, before the shelving of the case
 @)(++(*


 
« Last Edit: July 31, 2013, 07:15:19 PM by Redblossom »

Offline sadie

Re: Was the GNR response appropriate?
« Reply #21 on: August 01, 2013, 01:57:34 AM »
Amaral was a police officer, a chief inspector, until he was given the Heyho.  That is a relatively senior rank.  He should have known better

stephen25000

  • Guest
Re: Was the GNR response appropriate?
« Reply #22 on: August 01, 2013, 06:40:55 AM »
Amaral was a police officer, a chief inspector, until he was given the Heyho.  That is a relatively senior rank.  He should have known better

For the umpteenth time and again.

It wasn't just Amaral who thought the Mccanns were implicated in the disappearance of Madeleine, it was the PJ per se.

Offline sadie

Re: Was the GNR response appropriate?
« Reply #23 on: August 01, 2013, 03:31:46 PM »
For the umpteenth time and again.

It wasn't just Amaral who thought the Mccanns were implicated in the disappearance of Madeleine, it was the PJ per se.
Amaral was their boss.  They took the party line, publicly.

Altho they ignored him when he when he was givenn the "heave-ho".

I wonder why?

stephen25000

  • Guest
Re: Was the GNR response appropriate?
« Reply #24 on: August 01, 2013, 03:35:57 PM »
Amaral was their boss.  They took the party line, publicly.

Altho they ignored him when he when he was givenn the "heave-ho".

I wonder why?


The PJ investigated the Mccanns after been told to do so by the UK Police and it was the view of the PJ not just Amaral.

As has been said many times he was a bit player.

The Mccanns, in spite, then took legal action against him, even though many other people had said exactly the same things.

Offline sadie

Re: Was the GNR response appropriate?
« Reply #25 on: August 01, 2013, 04:30:00 PM »

The PJ investigated the Mccanns after been told to do so by the UK Police and it was the view of the PJ not just Amaral.

As has been said many times he was a bit player.

The Mccanns, in spite, then took legal action against him, even though many other people had said exactly the same things.
Oh, so they take orders from the British police, do they Stephen?

stephen25000

  • Guest
Re: Was the GNR response appropriate?
« Reply #26 on: August 01, 2013, 06:22:09 PM »
Oh, so they take orders from the British police, do they Stephen?

You really are unaware.

The UK police liaising with the PJ told/advised them to investigate the Mccanns.

Offline sadie

Re: Was the GNR response appropriate?
« Reply #27 on: August 02, 2013, 12:22:18 AM »
You really are unaware.

The UK police liaising with the PJ told/advised them to investigate the Mccanns.
Everybody knows that the family are the first to be investigated in a case like this Stephen.

Am surprised that, it seems, Amaral didn't



But then perhaps he did know and discussed it with the UK police, but when he was in trouble blamed it on the British police.

Used them as a "Get out"  ?