Why did Amaral and PJ suspect the McCanns and Murat as being somehow involved?

[Lyall]

Well I won't be on somebody else's forum.

But if this were any other case it would be the 5.30 to 8.30 time period that was concentrated on, not the time after that. There are no witnessses to either the child being alive, or patio door ever being left unlocked, other than friends of the parents - friends who have skilfully avoided speaking in public, right from the night of May 3rd 2007.

In any other case that would have been the story, right from the start.

That's the story that still needs to be told.

[AnneGuedes]

That's the story that still needs to be told.

Yes and on the basis of the PJ Files. Though the written answers by Mr and Mrs Payne (likely required because they had stated only once in Portimão) aren't in the files (compare with the written answers of JW which are in the files), there's a precious reference to their existence in the letter of a British police officer. They offer quite another perspective on what happened between 17h30 and 20h30 in the 5A.

[Benice]

Well I won't be on somebody else's forum.

But if this were any other case it would be the 5.30 to 8.30 time period that was concentrated on, not the time after that. There are no witnessses to either the child being alive, or patio door ever being left unlocked, other than friends of the parents - friends who have skilfully avoided speaking in public, right from the night of May 3rd 2007.

In any other case that would have been the story, right from the start.

That's the story that still needs to be told.

What story?  They are not public property.   The group of friends have nothing to defend - as they have committed no crimes and are under no obligation to make any public comments.   They were witnesses who gave their accounts of what happened during their time in PdL to the PJ as required, including the events of 3rd May.  They have not changed those statements.   The secrecy laws forbade them from discussing the case in public.   If you choose not to believe their statements - then that is not their problem.   

.


 

[AnneGuedes]

Why were the McCanns made by the Portuguese Police "official suspects" of involvement in the disappearance of Madeleine McCann ?
Eddie's finding in the 5A was no evidence (no sample could be taken neither in the bedroom corner nor on the balcony) but was intelligence about what could have happened to Madeleine McCann. We're in the beginning of August.
Instead of contemplating the hypothesis Madeleine was killed (possibly accidentally) in the flat and taken away by a frightened perpetrator, the McCanns insisted she had been taken alive (for reasons that are another matter). Obviously such unfounded attitude (the sniffer dogs failed to find an (alive) trail corroborating the path taken by faceless man when he was carrying Madeleine) forced the PJ team to interview the McCanns with the perspective of their possible involvement.
This happened in the middle of August and is off the record, likely because, as they weren't arguidos but witnesses, there was a legal risk their answers could be used against them. The McCanns likely failed to bring arguments against the involvement hypothesis. 
After that episode they knew their one and only theory, the abduction from bed, was if not discarded by the PJ, at least had been altered. They knew also the process was irreversible. And in fact, 3 weeks later, they were made arguidos, an initiative that had a negative effect in terms of image, a crucial detail for Mrs McCann in particular, but the positive effect to allow them to participate somehow in the investigation, an opportunity they didn't seize though that would have brushed their image.

[AnneGuedes]

The PJ Files were divulged by the Ministério Publico a short time after the shelving of the case. On DVD. This had never happened, though the Portuguese law allows consultation of the files in situ, in the place where they are shelved.
The DVD initiative was justified by the interest of the public and possibly by the preoccupation of stopping myths. Those files can't be copied, they are the property of the Ministério Publico, but they can be analysed and commented. That's even why they were put in the public domain.

[John]

Lyell

There are several on here that dont seem to mind being defamatory to Kate and Gerry.

Let them do it.  You can feed them info by PM or by email

Hows about that ?.

It is quite acceptable to refer to information which is already in the public domain.  Discussing scenarios which have already been suggested in no way defames anyone.  Nobody has said that the McCanns murdered their daughter or thereafter hid her remains and rightly so because I find that proposition frankly quite preposterous.

[AnneGuedes]

More preposterous than an abduction from bed by an organized gang ?
Less preposterous than an abduction from street by a faceless walker ?
As preposterous as an accidental fall whatever the reason of it ?
How would you define the criteria of the "preposterous" in this particular case, John ?

[John]

More preposterous than an abduction from bed by an organized gang ?
Less preposterous than an abduction from street by a faceless walker ?
As preposterous as an accidental fall whatever the reason of it ?
How would you define the criteria of the "preposterous" in this particular case, John ?

The whole idea that they murdered their eldest daughter is a non starter Anne which ever way you define "preposterous", wouldn't you agree?

[Angelo222]

It is quite acceptable to refer to information which is already in the public domain.  Discussing scenarios which have already been suggested in no way defames anyone.  Nobody has said that the McCanns murdered their daughter or thereafter hid her remains and rightly so because I find that proposition frankly quite preposterous.

I agree but not impossible.   I have repeated the evidence which the Portuguese authorities used in order to come to the conclusion that there just might be a case to answer.  This includes the conflicting statements, the evidence relating to the shutter and the window which points to the use of the front door, the flippant attitude towards any reported sightings, the refusal to answer questions, the cadaver dog alerts and the inconclusive forensic results etc

[John]

I agree but not impossible.   I have repeated the evidence which the Portuguese authorities used in order to come to the conclusion that there just might be a case to answer.  This includes the conflicting statements, the evidence relating to the shutter and the window which points to the use of the front door, the flippant attitude towards any reported sightings, the refusal to answer questions, the cadaver dog alerts and the inconclusive forensic results etc

I agree there are some startling ambiguities in the evidence thus where we are today still debating this case.  I will be interested to see the rest of the evidence and the key factor which ultimately pours doubt on their involvement.

[AnneGuedes]

The whole idea that they murdered their eldest daughter is a non starter Anne which ever way you define "preposterous", wouldn't you agree?

I quite agree that an intentional homicide, a murder, is undoubtedly preposterous.

[Angelo222]

I agree there are some startling ambiguities in the evidence thus where we are today still debating this case.  I will be interested to see the rest of the evidence and the key factor which ultimately pours doubt on their involvement.

I was coming to that John.   It seems that the PJ were conducting a double investigation at one stage.  On the one hand they were publicly looking for an abducted 4-year-old while on the other hand they were actively seeking evidence which could convict her parents.  Bizarre!!

[AnneGuedes]

the flippant attitude towards any reported sightings

I was amazed, two or three years ago, to watch an interview by a Portuguese TV channel (in Lisbon) where the journalist asked which sighting they had more invested hope on, they looked at each other and laughed "none, actually".

[Matthew Wyse]

I was amazed, two or three years ago, to watch an interview by a Portuguese TV channel (in Lisbon) where the journalist asked which sighting they had more invested hope on, they looked at each other and laughed "none, actually".

Not surprising is it Anne...a lot of searching going on presently >> NOT!!

[Angelo222]

Not surprising is it Anne...a lot of searching going on presently >> NOT!!

I couldn't have put that better myself Mat.    Obviously they have forgotten why the FUND was set up in the first place.